RE AKTER SHAHANA

CAMP 215/2019

[2020] HKCA 757

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 215 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 161 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) :

1)   Leave to appeal to Court of Final Appeal

1.1.  On 23 April 2020, this Court (Cheung and Barma JJA) gave the decision dismissing the applicant’s renewed application for an extension of time to appeal (‘extension decision’) against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam given on 2 April 2019 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

1.2.  The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 22 June 2020, for leave to appeal against our extension decision to the Court of Final Appeal.  We will deal with the application on paper.

1.3.  Doing the best we can to understand the applicant’s notice of motion, the applicant stated that it is not true that her claim has no substance.  She did not complain about the poor performance of the duty lawyer representing her because she feared that ‘she will be picked out for misappropriating by the adjudicator’.  She stated that she did not have enough time to address the document bundle.  She stated in her affirmation that after she received our judgment she was sick and was scared to leave home.  She stated that it was difficult for her to seek help due to the situation of the virus in Hong Kong and language problem.  In another affirmation, the applicant stated that the Court was wrong to hold that there was no state acquiescence and the Court failed to find details of the current situation in her home country.  She then exhibited certain previous Court documents without explaining their purpose.

1.4.  Contrary to the Registrar of Civil Appeals’ directions of 23 June 2020, the applicant did not lodge any written submissions in support of her notice of motion by the stipulated deadline.

2)  Legal principles

2.  Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

3)  Our view

3.1.  The matters stated by the applicant in her notice of motion and affirmations do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.  Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters she has raised in her documents.

3.2.  We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

4)  Disposition

4.  For these reasons, the notice of motion filed on 22 June 2020 is dismissed.