RE HOSSAIN MONIR

CACV 211/2018

[2019] HKCA 146

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 211 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 699 OF 2017)

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.  We handed down the judgment on 21 November 2018 (“the Judgment”) dismissing the applicant’s appeal from an order of DHCJ Josiah Lam given on 29 May 2018 dismissing his application for leave to start judicial review proceedings (“the Judge’s Decision”).

2.  On 6 December 2018, the applicant issued a Notice of Motion seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  The grounds were as follows:

“I would like to [inform] the Honourable Court that there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just relied on COL information and my previous facts which were in favor while rejecting my claim. [Actual] life occur different situation then what is mentioned in COL information. The Officer and [court prefer] to ignore the [overwhelming] of the evidence of this violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The Decision is [betray] a bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly not reasonable.”

3.  According to the directions made by Master Au Yeung, Registrar of Civil Appeals on 10 December 2018, the applicant shall lodge with the court his written submissions in support of the Notice of Motion on or before 20 December 2018.  The applicant failed to lodge his written submissions as directed.  Pursuant to Practice Direction 2.1, we are of the view that this application can be processed on paper without any oral hearing.

4.  The legal principle for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is set out in Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484:

“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.”

5.  We have thoroughly considered the applicant’s Notice of Motion.  The applicant seeks to re-argue the grounds and points which had already been canvassed.  The legal principles in respect of appeal and when this court should interfere with the Judge’s Decision were set out clearly in the Judgment.  

6.  The applicant has not identified any question of great general or public importance.  We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

7.  In the circumstances, we cannot find any basis for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal pursuant to section 22(1)(b).

8.  By virtue of the above, the Notice of Motion dated 6 December 2018 is dismissed.