LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS

[2018] HKCFI 1311

Court of First Instance11 June 2018

HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS HCAL234/2016 LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS

HCAL234/2016

[2018] HKCFI 1311

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

No. 234 of 2016

BETWEEN

	Limbu Umesh	Applicant
	and
	Secretary for Security	1^st Putative Respondent
	Director of Immigration	2^nd Putative Respondent
	Commissioner of Registration	3^rd Putative Respondent

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following;

consideration of the documents and the letter of the Applicant’s solicitors dated 8 June 2018 only; or

consideration of the documents and oral submissions by the Applicant or counsel [ ] in open court;

Order by the Honourable Mr Justice Au:

1. Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused.

2. There be no order as to costs, and the Applicant’s own costs be taxed in accordance with legal aid regulations.

Observations for the Applicant:

For the same reasons Zervos J has dismissed the judicial review application in Re Shove (HCAL 6/2014, 1 June 2018), the proposed grounds of challenge raised in this judicial review are not reasonably arguable (see also paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Form 86).

2. Leave therefore must be refused.

Dated the 11^th day of June 2018.

(Sunny Ng)
for Registrar, High Court

Where leave to apply has been granted, Applicants and their legal advisers are reminded of their obligation to reconsider the merits of their application in the light of the Respondent’s evidence

Notes for the Applicant:

If leave has been granted, the Applicant or his solicitors must:

a) serve on the respondent and such interested parties as may be directed by the Court the order granting leave and any directions given within 14 days after the leave was granted(Order 53, rule 4A);

b) issue the originating summons within 14 days after the grant of leave and serve it in accordance with Order 53, rule 5; and

c) supply to every other party copies of every affidavit which the Applicant proposes to use at the hearing, including the affidavit in support of the application for leave (Order 53, rule 6(5)).

Sent/Handed to the Applicant/the Applicant’s solicitors on 11/06/2018

Tso Au Yim & Yeung
Solicitors for the Applicant
Ref: EL/1509301/LL(LA)

Sent/Handed to the Putative Respondent/
the Putative Respondent’s solicitors / such Putative Interested Parties as may be directed by the Court / the Putative Interested Parties’ solicitors on 11/06/2018

Secretary for Security
The 1^st Putative Respondent

LIMBU UMESH v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND OTHERS

Citation

Court

Procedural posture

Issues

Holdings

Legal principles

Disposition

Key citations