RE KAMRUNNAHAR MST

CACV 307/2019

[2019] HKCA 1424

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 307OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 1722/2018)

____________________

____________________

_______________

JUDGMENT

_______________

Hon Lisa Wong J (giving the Judgment of the Court):

Application

1.  Before the court is a notice of motion filed on 30 October 2019 by the abovenamed applicant, applying for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) against this court’s judgment of the same date ([2019] HKCA 1199) (“Judgment”), dismissing the applicant’s appeal from a decision dated 20 June 2019 ([2019] HKCFI 1564) by Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung, refusing her leave to apply for judicial review of the decision dated 10 August 2018 of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning her non-refoulement claim.

Paper disposal appropriate

2.  Pursuant to the direction of the Registrar of Civil Appeals, unless this court otherwise directs, the notice of motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. We agree with the Registrar that a paper disposal is appropriate in this case.

Statutory threshold for leave to appeal to the CFA

3.  Under s 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484), an appeal shall lie to the CFA at the discretion of the Court of Appeal (“CA”) or the CFA from any civil judgment of the CA if 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 CFA for decision.

Applicant’s contentions in support of leave to appeal to CFA

4.  In seeking leave to appeal to the CFA, the applicant asserted in the notice of motion as follows (sic):

“ON 30 OCTOBER 2019 THE COURT OF APPEAL CANCEL MY LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW. I AM TOTALY NOT SATISFY ABOUT THIS JUDGMENT. BUT I HAVE NO WAY EXCEPT GOING TO THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL. FOR THE GREATEST INTEREST OF OPPRESSED PEOPLE I WISH I WILL GET GOOD JUDGMENT FORM THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL.”

5.  In breach of paragraph 1 of the directions given by the Registrar on 1 November 2019, the applicant failed to lodge any written submission in support of her notice of motion on or before 13 November 2019 or at all. We shall determine this application on the basis of the notice of motion.

Discussion

6.  The applicant has plainly not raised any issue for determination by the CFA, whether of great, general or public importance or otherwise.

7.  Nor do we see any scope to grant leave under the “or otherwise” limb.

8.  The applicant made no attempt whatsoever to engage the reasons given in the Judgment. Neither her disappointment with the Judgment (though understandable) nor her hope for a better outcome in the CFA is a proper ground for appeal to the CFA. In particular, we do not see how the “interest of oppressed people” might be served by allowing the applicant to appeal to the CFA, given that her non-refoulement claim was based upon an alleged fear of harm arising from an abusive marriage.

9.  As neither of the statutory criteria under s 22(1)(b) for leave to appeal to the CFA is met, we dismiss the notice of motion.