RE SIDHU BALVEER SINGH AND OTHERS

CACV 223/2020

[2021] HKCA 1945

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 223 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 312 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

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

1.  This court (Yuen, G Lam JJA and Ng J)  handed down judgment on 6 July 2021 ([2021] HKCA 948)  dismissing the appeal of the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd applicants (collectively called “the Applicants”)  against an order of DHCJ Bruno Chan (“the Judge”)  given on 23 June 2020 refusing to give the Applicants leave to apply for judicial review in respect of their non-refoulement claims (“the Judge’s Decision”).

2.  On 29 June 2020, the Applicants filed a Notice of Appeal to appeal against the Judge’s Decision.  As mentioned earlier, in our judgment of 6 July 2021, we dismissed the Applicants’ appeal. The facts and issues in the appeal before this court, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.  On 28 July 2021, the Applicants filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal on the following grounds:

“I want to tell you I received the decision of Director of immigration, Torture Claims Appeal Board, The High Court and the Court of Appeal but I did not got justice. I kindly request to you give me justice that why please give me the permission to enter Court of Final Appeal.”

4.  Pursuant to the directions given by Registrar of Civil Appeals on 28 July 2021 and Practice Direction 2.1, the Applicants lodged their written submissions on 11 August 2021.  The Registrar of Civil Appeals further directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  As it is appropriate to do so, we proceeded to determine this application on paper. 

5.  In the Applicants’ written submissions, they simply repeated their written submissions for appeal against the Judge’s Decision lodged with this Court on 21 May 2021. 

6.  Section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted if 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.

7.  Having regard to the judgment of this court, the Applicants’ intended appeal has no merits.  No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by s.22(1)(b)  of the HKCFAO.   

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

9.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 28 July 2021 is dismissed.