RE BAPARY YEBRAHIM

HCAL 242/2017

[2019] HKCFI 1201

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO. 242 OF 2017

___________________________

___________________________

________________

D E C I S I O N

________________

1.  The Applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review against the rejection of his non-refoulement claims by the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“Board”) was declined by the court on 9 January 2018 (“Decision”). 

2.  The Applicant filed a Summons dated 4 February 2019, with an Affirmation of the same date, seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.  Those documents were filed on 25 March 2019.  The Summons is treated as an application for leave to appeal out of time.

3.  Neither of the documents filed by the Applicant is entirely legible.  The Applicant was unable to assist the court as to their contents, save that they were written by a friend.  From what can be discerned, there is nothing in the Summons which goes to the merits of this application. As for the Affirmation, there is an unparticularised assertion that the dismissal of the leave application was unfair in that the court had failed to take into account that the Board had relied heavily on unverified country of origin information.

4.  At the hearing, the Applicant was given ample opportunity to make submissions to the court.  All that he had said was that he had been in custody for a long time and indicated that he would like to have the decision of the court quickly.  He told the court that he was imprisoned in March 2018 for working illegally in Hong Kong.  Since his release from prison on 17 January 2019, he had been detained under the custody of the Immigration Department.

5.  On any view, the delay in pursuing the intended appeal is inordinate.  Such delay has not been properly explained.  The Applicant had the Decision for 2 months before he was imprisoned. 

6.  No merit has been demonstrated about the intended appeal. 

7.  In the premises, this application must be dismissed and I do so.