MUHAMMAD JAMIL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CACV 354/2022

[2023] HKCA 273

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 354 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1122 OF 2019)

_______________

BETWEEN

_______________

_______________

JUDGMENT

_______________

Hon Fung J (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  The Applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of this Court handed down on 13 January 2023 ([2023] HKCA 25). The Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 15 August 2022 in refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning his non-refoulement claim.

2.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed that the notice of motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged written submissions on 31 January 2023. Having considered his written submissions and the papers, it is considered appropriate to determine this application on paper.

Grounds of Appeal

3.  In the Notice of Motion filed on 17 January 2023, the applicant stated that all the judgments are not good for him and he wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal.

4.  In his written submissions, he contended that there are many mistakes in the processing of his claim. He further submitted that he and all his asylum seeker friends are facing the same problem as Pakistan is the worst country in the world and they face serious life problems every day.

Analysis

5.  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.

6.  In the present application, the applicant has not identified any error of the Court of Appeal in dismissing his appeal. He is simply contending that the asylum seekers are facing the same problem. His submissions are just bare assertions without substance and he has failed to provide any particulars or evidence in support. He has failed to demonstrate that there is 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.  For the above reasons, the Notice of Motion filed on 17 January 2023 should be dismissed.