RE LAKHVIR SINGH

HCAL 230/2018

[2020] HKCFI 2620

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST
NO 230 OF 2018   

_____________

_____________

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

1.  On 17 June 2020 I refused to extend time for the Applicant’s late application for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) in dismissing his appeal regarding his non-refoulement claim upon finding that there was no good reason for his serious delay with his intended application, that none of the grounds put forward by him reasonably arguable for his intended challenge, that there was no error of law or procedural unfairness in the process before the Director of Immigration or the Board or in their decisions, and that there was no reasonable prospect of success in his intended application.

2.  The Applicant now by a summons issued on 6 July 2020 seeks extension of time to appeal against that decision, as the 14-day period for him to file his appeal under Order 53 rule 3(4) of the Rules of High Court, Cap 4A ended on 1 July 2020, and hence he was late by 5 days with his intended appeal. 

3.  In considering whether to extend time for appealing against a decision refusing leave to apply for judicial review, the court shall have regard to (i) the length of the delay; (ii) the reason for the delay; (iii) the prospect of the intended appeal; and (iv) the prejudice to the respondent if an extension of time were granted: see Re MK HCMP 2609/2016, 10 January 2017; Chu On Fong Winter v The Appeal Panel (Housing) HCMP 982/2017, 20 July 2017; Islam Raja Rais v Director of Immigration HCMP 881/2017, 26 June 2017; Re Gurung Min Bahadur [2018] HKCA 226; and Re Saqlain Muhammad [2018] HKCA 346.

4.  In the Applicant’s case, a delay of 5 days may not be considered as significant, for which he explained both in his affirmation and at the hearing that on 29 June 2020, which was still within the 14-day period for him to file his appeal, he suffered injuries to both his feet in an accident, and for which he was admitted into Pok Oi Hospital for medical treatments, and hence he was prevented from filing his appeal within the required 14-day period.

5.  In support of his claim the Applicant has attached to his affirmation copies of medical reports from the hospital showing the injuries to both his feet and for which he received, inter alia, an anti-tetanus injection at the hospital on that day.

6.  In the circumstances, and having examined the attached documentary evidence, I accept the Applicant’s explanation for his insignificant delay that there are justifications to extend time for the filing of his intended appeal, and accordingly I grant the Applicant an extension of time to file his notice of appeal within 14 days of this order.