RE MAHILUM ARLYN AROPO

CACV 552/2020

[2021] HKCA 1031

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 1894 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

Hon B Chu J (giving the Decision of the Court) :

1)  Leave to appeal to Court of Final Appeal

1.1   On 10 June 2021, this Court handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung given on 29 June 2020 refusing to extend time for the applicant to apply for leave to apply for judicial review and the applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed.

1.2   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.  We will not repeat them here.

1.3   The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion dated 23 June 2021, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

1.4   The applicant stated in her notice of motion that “the Judge simply followed the TCAB decision without considering how the decision came into being.  They disregard my danger in my home country”.  The applicant also lodged a letter of written submissions dated 5 July 2021.

1.5   In her written submissions, the applicant stated she wanted to stay in Hong Kong because of her children and their father are here and her children are going to study P-1 and K-3 in 2021-2022, that the father is Indian and a refugee, and she and the father together take care of the children who are very safe in Hong Kong.  The applicant attached to her written submissions a copy of an agreement with the International Social Service Hong Kong Branch in relation to the provision of assistance to her, Baljit Singh, Amarveer Singh, and Mehreen Singh between 7 June 2021 until 8 July 2021 and copies of the birth certificates of Amarveer Singh and Mehreen Singh born to her and Baljit Singh respectively in August 2015 and in November 2016.

2)  Legal principles

2.   Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

3)  Our view

3.1   The matters stated by the applicant in her notice of motion do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.  Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters she has raised in his notice of motion.

3.2   We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

4)  Disposition

4.   For these reasons, the notice of motion dated 23 June 2021 is dismissed.