ABBAS RAZA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER

CAMP 4/2021

[2022] HKCA 171

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 4 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1199 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  This is the applicant’s Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Kwan VP and G Lam JA) handed down on 14 July 2021 ([2021] HKCA 989). The Court of Appeal dismissed his application for extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 10 June 2020 ([2020] HKCFI 1085) refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim.

2.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 7 October 2021 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged his written submissions on 21 October 2021. Having read his written submissions and the papers of this case, we consider it appropriate to determine this application on paper and will proceed accordingly.

3.  The applicant is a national of Pakistan. He entered Hong Kong illegally on 19 October 2006 and was arrested by the police on the same day. He lodged a torture claim which was rejected by the Director on 13 September 2012. He lodged a non-refoulement claim on 19 February 2014 on the basis that if he returns to Pakistan he will be harmed or killed by a local elected official because of a land dispute.

4.  He took out a summons in the court below to seek an extension of time to appeal against the decision of the judge. His application was late by two weeks. It was refused by the judge on 10 November 2020[1].

5.  The applicant renewed his application to the Court of Appeal on 4 January 2021. The application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 14 July 2021 because there is no prospect of success in the intended appeal.

Grounds of appeal

6.  In the Notice of Motion, the applicant stated that he did not get true justice and he wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal to get justice.

7.  In his written submissions, he only reiterated the problems he faced in Pakistan.

Analysis and disposition

8.  Under section 24(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484, “the Ordinance”), application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal shall be filed within 28 days from the date of the judgment to be appealed from. Section 24(5) further provides that the Court of Appeal may, if it considers appropriate, extend the time for making application for leave to appeal.

9.  Good grounds have to be shown by the applicant for the court to grant an extension of time. The relevant factors in considering whether extension of time should be given are the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, the merits of the proposed appeal, and the prejudice to the other party (Re Rajaram Razeena [2019] HKCA 959 at §1.4).

10.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Ordinance 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.

11.  Taking account of the Court’s summer vacation in August 2021, the time for the applicant to seek leave to appeal against the judgment expired on 13 September 2021. His application was late for more than three weeks and he did not provide any explanation for the delay.

12.  In any event, the applicant’s ground is just bare assertion without any particulars or elaboration. He failed to demonstrate that the Court of Appeal was wrong in dismissing his application for extension of time to appeal. Besides, he has not identified 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).

13.  For the above reasons, the Notice of Motion filed out of time on 7 October 2021 is dismissed and leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is refused.