KAMRUZZAMAN ANI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CACV 190 /2018

[2018] HKCA 893

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 190 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 494 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan JA (giving the judgment of the court):

1.  This is the applicant’s application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal handed down on 30 August 2018 dismissing his appeal against the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim.

2.  In his notice of motion filed on 3 September 2018, it is stated as follows:

“The claims that the Judgment has made stated is no substance in the grounds of the application is not true.

On the strength of the grounds has not made a complain about the poor performance of his duty lawyer is due of fearing he will be picked out for misappropriating by the adjudicator.

The applicant gently did not have enough time to address the bundle.

Rest of the grounds I will submit as soon as possible.”

3.  He also filed a supporting affirmation dated 3 September 2018.  He stated in the affirmation that “The Judgment from the Court of Appeal is unfair and improper.  I do not agree with the Judgment dated 30/8/2018.”

4.  On 5 September 2018, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed that the applicant shall lodge with the court his written submission in support of this notice of motion on or before 17 September 2018. The applicant failed to lodge his submission as directed.

5.  On 24 September 2018, the Registrar directed that despite the applicant’s latest application for legal aid[1], there shall be no stay of proceedings under section 15 of the Legal Aid Ordinance, Cap 91 and any stay effected was thereby lifted.  The Registrar further directed that the applicant shall lodge on or before 11 October 2018 his submission in support of his notice of motion, failing which he shall be deemed to be relying only on the representations made in his notice of motion and shall be debarred from lodging any further written submission.

6.  The applicant has not to date lodged any written submission.

7.  Pursuant to Practice Direction 2.1 para 3, we would determine this application on paper without an oral hearing.

8.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484 provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, 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.

9.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b).  The matters stated in the notice of motion and supporting affirmation only concern case‑specific matters, they do not involve any issue of great general or public importance.  There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

10.  We therefore dismiss the application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.