RE BIAG CYRIL DIS IW

CACV 189/2022

[2023] HKCA 302

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 189 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2204 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 29 August 2022 ([2022] HKCA 1266) dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an order of DHCJ K.W. Lung given on 25 April 2022 refusing to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review in respect of his non‑refoulement claim.

2.  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 13 September 2022, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  The Notice of Motion stated:

“My non-refoulement claim application was rejected by the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board. My leave to apply for judicial review was not granted by the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal. Before I bring my claim application to the Court of Final Appeal please grant me more time to appeal my claim because my life is still in danger if I go back to the Philippines.”

4.  Pursuant to the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals made on 13 September 2022, the applicant should lodge his written submissions on or before 27 September 2022. He failed to do so.  The Registrar further directed that upon the expiry of the time for taking the aforesaid step 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.

5.  The contents of the Notice of Motion are ambiguous.  Insofar as the applicant is asking for an extension of time to bring an application for leave to appeal to the CFA, he has not provided any evidence in support of such an application and there is no reason to grant it.  Insofar as it is the actual application for leave, section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (“HKCFAO”) (Cap. 484) 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.

6.  Having regard to this court’s judgment, 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.    

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

8.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 13 September 2022 is dismissed.