AKTER SHAMIMA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CAMP 240/2021

[2022] HKCA 1001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 240 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2552 OF 2018)

________________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  This is the applicant’s Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Kwan VP and Yuen JA) handed down on 14 January 2022 ([2022] HKCA 18). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time for the applicant to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge C P Pang dated 4 February 2021 ([2021] HKCFI 237) dismissing the application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning the applicant’s non-refoulement claim.

2.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 10 February 2022 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged her written submissions on 24 February 2022. Having considered her written submissions and the papers, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and proceed to do so.

3.  The applicant is a national of Bangladesh. She last entered Hong Kong on 19 July 2016 to work as a foreign domestic helper. Her employment contract was terminated prematurely on 31 July 2016 but she did not depart within the prescribed time limit. She was arrested by the police on 19 March 2017. She lodged a non-refoulement claim on 22 March 2017 on the basis that, if refouled, she would be harmed or killed by her husband’s brothers and members of the Awami League and by money lenders as she had defaulted in paying loans.

4.  She took out a summons in the court below to seek an extension of time to appeal against the decision of the judge. It was refused by the judge on 10 June 2021[1].

5.  The applicant renewed her application to the Court of Appeal for extension of time to appeal on 5 July 2021. The application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 14 January 2022 as the applicant failed to show any prospect of success in her intended appeal.

Grounds of appeal

6.  In the Notice of Motion filed on 10 February 2022, the applicant only stated that her claims and applications were rejected so she wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal without giving any specific grounds of appeal.

7.  In her written submissions, she reiterated her problems in Bangladesh and stressed that the current ruling party is her enemy. She further contended that the Court of Appeal’s decision is unfair, not only for her but the results of all asylum cases are the same.

Analysis and disposition

8.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484) provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, 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.

9.  The applicant’s grounds and submissions are just bare assertions without evidence in support. In particular, she has not identified any valid basis for alleging that the Court of Appeal’s decision is incorrect or unfair. As pointed out in the decision of the Court of Appeal, she did not put forward any intended grounds of appeal against the judge’s decision.

10.  Furthermore, she has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b). There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

11.  For the above reasons, we refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 10 February 2022.