LUU NGOC QUYET v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

CACV 167 /2023, [2024] HKCA 1075

On appeal from [2023] HKCFI 1404

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 167 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1274 OF 2019)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  This is an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal handed down on 31 January 2024 ([2024] HKCA 127). The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 24 May 2023 refusing to grant leave for the applicant to bring judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning his non-refoulement claim.

2.  The Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed that the applicant shall lodge written submissions on or before 29 February 2024.  It was further directed that the notice of motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing upon compliance with the said direction or the expiry of the time for complying with the direction.  The applicant has not lodged any written submissions by the prescribed deadline.  Having considered the papers of this case, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and proceed to do so.

Analysis and Disposition

3.  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.

4.  In the notice of motion filed on 15 February 2024, the applicant reiterated substantially the same grounds as in his notice of appeal filed with this court earlier.  He added that the Immigration Department did not consider the human rights under the Basic Law or the “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act”, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

5.  It is not open to the applicant to put forward a new ground for the first time at this late stage of the proceedings, well outside the time limit for bringing judicial review proceedings.  In any event, he has provided no particulars or evidence in support of his new ground.

6.  His other grounds have already been considered and rejected by this court for reasons stated in our judgment dated 31 January 2024.  He failed to demonstrate there is any mistake in our decision.  He also 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).  There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

7.  Therefore, we refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the notice of motion filed on 15 February 2024.