RE HUMAGAI INDRA PRASAD

CAMP 143/2020

[2021] HKCA 581

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 143 OF 2020

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL 556/2018)

____________________

____________________

___________________

JUDGMENT

____________________

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

1.  As indicated in the directions of 11 March 2021, this Court will process this application as an application for extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan of 17 August 2020 in HCAL 556/2018. By that decision, the Judge refused to grant extension of time to the applicant to apply for judicial review and dismissed his application.

2.  By a summons of 25 August 2020, the applicant made the present application to this court.  Notwithstanding the directions of 11 March 2021, he did not lodge submission to support his application.  We therefore proceed to consider the summons based on the materials already before the court as indicated in those directions.

3.  Though he would have been within time if he brought an appeal on 25 August 2020 and he did not require leave to bring such appeal (see H v Director of Immigration [2020] HKCFA 22, 14 July 2020), he did not do so. 

4.  He is now out of time.  Thus, we process this application as an application for extension of time.

5.  Since he did not file any affirmation or submission to account for his delay, we do not know if he was under the misapprehension that the previous practice (prior to the judgment in H v Director of Immigration, supra) of seeking leave was applicable. 

6.  In view of his lack of legal representation and the fact that H v Director of Immigration, supra was handed down shortly before his summons of 25 August 2020, we will give him the benefit of doubt in this regard.  We shall examine if there is any reasonable prospect of success in the intended appeal.  If there is, we shall grant extension of time. 

7.  We cannot see any merit in the intended appeal. As the judge pointed out in the CALL-1 Form ([2020] HKCFI 2005) at [11] and [15] there was no proper ground for seeking judicial review in his application. For the reasons given further at [16] to [18], his case has no merit.

8.  In the documents filed by the applicant before us (his summons and affirmation of 25 August 2020), there is also nothing to show that the judge erred in coming to his conclusion.  Apart from producing a copy of the CALL-1 Form, he only asserted of his life is in danger and he is not going back to his home country.

9.  In the circumstances, we refuse to grant extension of time for a hopeless appeal to be brought.  The summons of 25 August 2020 is dismissed accordingly.