RE IMRAN HUSSAIN

CAMP 323/2021

[2023] HKCA 308

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 323 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 946 OF 2018)

_________________________

_________________________

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.  This court handed down judgment on 3 August 2022 ([2022] HKCA 1127) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal against an order of DHCJ Bruno Chan given on 21 September 2020 in which he refused the applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non‑refoulement claim.

2.  The facts and issues in the application 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 30 September 2022, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. However, it was out of time, as section 24(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (“HKCFAO”) (Cap. 484) stipulates that the deadline for filing an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal is 28 days from the date of the judgment to be appealed from. Excluding the Summer Vacation (1 - 31 August) as provided under section 31(1) of the High Court Ordinance (Cap. 4), the deadline for filing the Notice of Motion expired on 28 September 2022.

4.  However, under sections 24(5) and 24(6) of the HKCFAO, the Court of Appeal has a discretion to extend the appeal period even though the application for extension is not made until after the expiration of that period. In the exercise of our discretion whether or not to extend the appeal period, we should consider the length of the delay, the applicant’s reasons for the delay, the merits of the intended appeal, and whether any prejudice would be suffered by the other party.

5.  In the present case, the applicant was late by 2 days and he explained in his supporting affirmation that he forgot to update his new address with the court and that caused the delay. As in any event the delay is insignificant, we would focus on the merits of his application.

6.  The applicant has not shown any merits in this intended application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. He advanced the following in the Notice of Motion:

“I am the applicant herein, In the order give to the court There some error in my decision Decision maker just relied on Col information and my previous facts which were favour on reject my claims. Actual life occur different situation the mentioned Col information Immigration officer and Hong Kong High Court’s prefers to ignore the overwhelming of the evidence of the violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining The decision is betray bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and calcute to reject my claims Also I am requested to court I don’t have legal representative could you please provide me and consider my real situation and safe my life’s as a human being Bundle of thanks.” (sic)

7.  Pursuant to the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals given on 30 September 2022, the applicant should lodge his written submissions on or before 14 October 2022. He failed to do so. The Registrar further directed upon expiry of the time for taking the aforementioned steps, and unless otherwise directed, the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing. As we consider it appropriate, this Notice of Motion is determined on paper without an oral hearing.

8.  Section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO 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.

9.  Having regard to the judgment of this court, the applicant’s intended appeal has no merit at all. No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.

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

11.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 30 September 2022 is dismissed.