|
HCAL 717/2019
[2024] HKCFI 2361
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST NO 717 OF 2019
_____________
| BETWEEN |
|
|
|
Chantharasiri Singha |
Applicant |
|
and
|
|
|
Torture Claims Appeal Board /
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
|
Putative Respondent |
|
and
|
|
|
Director of Immigration
|
Putative Interested Party |
_____________
| Before: |
Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung in Chambers |
| Date of Decision: |
24 September 2024 |
____________________
D E C I S I O N
____________________
The application
1. The applicant is an illegal immigrant by staying in Hong Kong without permission and he lodged a non-refoulement claim with the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). The Director rejected his claim. He appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). By Decision dated 3 February 2017 (“the Board’s Decision”), the Board dismissed his appeal.
2. Pursuant to Order 53, rule 3(2) of the Rules of the High Court (“RHC”), the applicant filed Form No. 86 to apply for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.
3. By Order dated 13 January 2023 (“the Court’s decision”), the Court dismissed his application for the reason that there is no realistic prospect of success in his intended application. The Court’s decision was, by order of the Court, re-sent to the applicant on 27 March 2023 and 20 December 2023 respectively. The effective date for service of the Court’s decision is therefore deemed to have served on the applicant on 21 December 2023, which is not a specified day, pursuant to Order 65, rules 5 and 7 of the RHC[1]. The deadline for appeal is on 5 January 2024.
4. By summons filed on 5 February 2024, the applicant applied for appeal against the Court’s decision out of time. His application is late for one month.
5. The applicant has reasonable ground of success against the Board’s decision not to extend time for him to appeal, but his reason for his delay to file Form 86 for judicial review of the Board’s Decision was not acceptable. This Court had extended time for him to appeal the Court’s decision within 14 days as from 31 May 2024. Time expires on 14 June 2024.
6. The applicant failed to file the notice of appeal within time. He now applies for further extension of time. His reasons for his delay are that he is an illiterate and he needs his cell-mate to advise him of his case.
7. In the circumstances, I extend time for the applicant to appeal against the Court’s decision. The applicant shall file his notice of appeal within 14 days from the date of this Order.
| |
(K.W. Lung) |
| |
Deputy High Court Judge |
The applicant was not represented.
[1] Ordinary service: how effected (O. 65, r. 5)
(2) For the purposes of this rule, and of section 8 of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1), in its application to this rule, the proper address of any person on whom a document is to be served in accordance with this rule shall be the address for service of that person, but if at the time when service is effected that person has no address for service his proper address for the purposes aforesaid shall be-
(b) in the case of an individual, his usual or last known address.
Effect of service at certain time (O. 65, r. 7)
(2) For computing a period of time after service of the document, the document is deemed to be served on the next following day, not being a specified day.
|