RE LE THI ANH

CAMP 266/2022, [2024] HKCA 1018

On appeal from [2022] HKCFI 660

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 266 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2708 OF 2018)

__________________

__________________

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

Hon Kwan Ag CJHC (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 Yuen JA) handed down on 15 September 2023 ([2023] HKCA 1048). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 8 March 2022 dismissing the application for leave to seek judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) concerning the applicant’s non-refoulement claim.

2.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed that the applicant shall lodge written submissions on or before 3 October 2023. It was further directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing upon compliance with the said direction or the expiry of the time for complying with the direction. The applicant did not lodge any written submissions by the prescribed deadline. Having considered the papers of this case, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper.

Notice of Motion

3.  What the applicant stated in the Notice of Motion filed on 18 September 2023 may be summarised as follows:

(1)  It was unsatisfactory for the Court of Appeal to rule that the applicant had no chance of success in reviewing the decisions of the Director of Immigration (“the Director”) and the Board;

(2)  If the applicant returns to Vietnam, her life will be seriously threatened or she will probably be killed because the creditors and gangsters in Vietnam are different from those in Hong Kong. They disregard the law and are willing to kill;

(3)  Internal relocation is completely unfeasible as the applicant will face many difficulties and obstacles;

(4)  With the nationwide social network of the gangsters and their clandestine connections with corrupt people in the government and police apparatus, it is quite possible for the creditors and gangsters to find out the applicant’s new residence;

(5)  The Director did not consider the human rights under the Basic Law or the “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act”, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Disposition

4.  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.

5.  The applicant’s grounds in the present application are just bare assertions without particulars and evidence in support. She failed to identify any particular mistakes in the judgment of the Court of Appeal. She also failed to raise 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). In addition, there is no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

6.  We therefore dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 18 September 2023.