SHEKH MAHAMMAD IQLAZ v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CACV 324/2018

[2019] HKCA 535

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 324 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 1126 OF 2017)

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

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

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.  This court handed down judgment on 20 February 2019 ([2019] HKCA 180) dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an order of DHCJ Josiah Lam given on 9 July 2018 refusing his application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non‑refoulement claim. The facts and issues in the appeal before the Court of Appeal, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated.

2.  The applicant subsequently applied, by a Notice of Motion on 28 February 2019, for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

3.  The applicant stated in his Notice of Motion that:

“My problem in my country has not solved. At this moment my problem is so high. But Immigration, appeal board and court could not understand. If Hong Kong Government send me back I will be killed.”

4.  The Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 4 March 2019 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  We agree it is appropriate to determine this application on paper.

5.  The applicant requested an extension of 2 months to file his written submissions.  On 15 March 2019, the Registrar of Civil Appeals made an unless order directing that unless the applicant lodged his written submissions by 4 p.m. on 3 April 2019, he shall be debarred from doing so, and he will be deemed to be relying only on the representations made in the Notice of Motion in his application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“the Unless Order”).  The applicant failed to comply with the Unless Order and filed his written submissions on 4 April 2019 which was one day late.  Although no reason was given for his failure to file the written submission by 3 April 2019, we take into account that the delay was only by one day, and we have therefore considered the contents of his written submissions.  However, in those submissions he has only repeated the alleged facts of his case and complained that the Director of Immigration, Torture Claims Appeal Board and the Hong Kong courts did not understand his problems in Bangladesh.   

6.  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.

7.  No question of great general or public importance has been identified in the grounds in the Notice of Motion.

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

9.  In the circumstances, we cannot find any basis for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

10.  By virtue of the above, the Notice of Motion dated 28 February 2019 is dismissed.

The applicant acting in person