RE LUU VAN LY

CACV 205/2023, [2025] HKCA 381

On Appeal From [2023] HKCFI 1605

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 205 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 1997 OF 2020)

________________________

________________________

________________________

DECISION

________________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court)  :

I. Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.  On 30 July 2024, this Court (Cheung and Chow JJA)  handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan given on 16 June 2023 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

2.  The facts and issues of the appeal as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it are set out in our judgment.  We will not repeat them here.

3.  The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 7 August 2024, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant stated in his notice of motion the following in summary :

1)  It was unsatisfactory that the Court of Appeal ruled that he had no chance of success;

2)  He will be tortured or even killed if he returns to Vietnam because the gangsters there are different from those in Hong Kong;

3)  Relocation was not feasible, as he will face difficulties and he has poor health;

4)  There is a nationwide social network of gangsters and it is quite possible for the gangsters to find his location;

5)  The Immigration Department did not consider his human rights under the Basic Law; and

6)  He seeks justice and asks for asylum in Hong Kong.

4.  Despite the directions from the High Court to the applicant dated 7 August 2024, the applicant failed to lodge the skeleton argument by the stipulated time.  Under [7] of those directions, the applicant has for failing to lodge written submissions in time abandoned his right to rely on written submissions.  The Court will deal with this application on the available materials.

II.  Our view

5.  Under section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484)  (‘the Ordinance’)  leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

6.  The matters stated by the applicant in his notice of motion are broad and vague assertions that do not pertain to nor explain and elaborate on the particular circumstances of the applicant.  A challenge to findings of fact is within the province of the Board.  In any event, the matters stated do not constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b)  of the Ordinance.  Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters raised by the applicant.

7.  We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b)  of the Ordinance.

III.  Disposition

8.  For these reasons, the notice of motion dated 7 August 2024 is dismissed.