MD TANVIR v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

CACV 590/2021

[2022] HKCA 838

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 590 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 1527 OF 2021)

____________________

____________________

____________________

JUDGMENT

____________________

Hon Chow JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  On 17 May 2022, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”) dismissing the Applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 14 December 2021 refusing to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 28 October 2021.

2.  The Applicant now applies by Notice of Motion dated 24 May 2022 for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the following is stated:

“The Director of Immigration dismissed my claim of non refoulement. The High Court dismissed my leave to apply for judicial review. The Court of Appeal too dismissed my leave. I have some objection about the court judgment. I want to go to the Court of Final Appeal.”

3.  In the Applicant’s written submissions dated 7 June 2022, the Applicant sets out the history of the proceedings and repeats the basis of his non-refoulement claim, but has failed to point to any alleged error in the CA Judgment.

4.  Under s 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of, inter alia, the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.

5.  No question of great general or public importance involved in the proposed appeal is identified in the Notice of Motion.  We are unable to see any such question being involved in the proposed appeal.  We are satisfied that the intended appeal has no merits and no reasonable prospect of success.  There is also no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “or otherwise” limb in s 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

6.  Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion is dismissed.