SAMAD TARIQ v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER

CACV 46/2019

[2019] HKCA 1121

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 46 OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 30 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

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

1.  This court (Hon Yuen JA and Lisa Wong J) handed down judgment on 24 July 2019 ([2019] HKCA 810) dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an order of DHCJ Bruno Chan (“the Judge”) given on 25 January 2019 refusing his application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim. The facts and issues in the appeal before the Court of Appeal, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

2.  The applicant subsequently applied, by a Notice of Motion on 19 August 2019, for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  He lodged his written submissions on 2 September 2019.

3.  On 20 August 2019, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  We agree it is appropriate to determine this application on paper.

4.  The applicant stated the following in his Notice of Motion.

“The judgment made by the Court of Appeal dismissed the current situation in Pakistan, which is the main reason why I fled to Hong Kong in the first place.

It is still dangerous for me to go back to Pakistan.

However, the Court only focus on the skeleton argument without taking into account of my reason of my fleeing.  That is also the spirit of the UNCAT.”

5.  In the applicant’s submissions, he challenged the Board’s reliance on COI and complained about the lack of legal representation and language assistance. These arguments had already been dealt with in detail by the Judge and in paragraph 14 of our judgment.

6.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal if the question involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

7.  No question of great general or public importance has been identified in the grounds in the Notice of Motion.

8.  Nor do we see any basis for granting leave on the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

9.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion dated 19 August 2019 is dismissed.