RE MAHMOOD ASJAD

CAMP 364/2022, [2025] HKCA 843

On Appeal From [2022] HKCFI 1437

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 364 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 2338 OF 2018)

__________________________________

__________________________________

_____________

DECISION

_____________

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

1)  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.  On 12 June 2023, this Court handed down the judgment ([2023] HKCA 734) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal an order of Deputy High Court Judge KW Lung given on 19 May 2022 refusing his application for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non ‑ refoulement claim.

2.  On 28 January 2025, the applicant filed a notice of motion and affirmation with exhibits applying for leave to appeal this Court’s order to the Court of Final Appeal out of time. The affirmation consists of two pages of enclosures. The applicant also lodged written submissions consisting of two pages on 10 February 2025.

3.  On 24 March 2025, the Appeal’s Registry received an affirmation from the applicant requesting the Court to close his case because he wanted to go back to his country.

2)  Our view

4.  Having considered the applicant’s documents, we see no reason to depart from the usual practice of determining applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on paper without an oral hearing. We have, therefore, proceeded to determine the applicant’s application on the basis of the documents in the case.

5.  The background to this case and the applicant’s claim have been set out in our judgment. We will not repeat them.

6.  Section 24(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (‘HKCFAO’) (Cap. 484) provides that 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 extend the time for the filing of the notice of motion.

7.  The applicant’s present application is out of time by over one year and six months. The applicant did not provide any reason for the delay.

8.  As to the merit of the intended appeal, section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted if 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.

9.  The notice of motion simply stated bare allegations including the Judge ignoring many things, or the Judge favoured the Board’s decision and the Director’s decision, or that the decision was unfair. The supporting affirmation contains a two - page exhibit in which the applicant stated that the Judges did not apply the principle of irrationality, the decision was illegal and unlawful, bribery was common among the police, and the Judgment was against facts, without any evidence in support nor explanations as to how these allegations relate to the applicant’s case.

10.  The two‑page written submission by the applicant stated that the applicant’s life will be worse if refouled, the applicant’s points were ignored, torture and death within police custody was common, bribery among Pakistan police was rampant, and it was impossible for the applicant to return to Pakistan now.

11.  We are of the view that the grounds and arguments put forward by the applicant do not constitute viable grounds for giving leave to appeal. Importantly, no question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.

12.  Nor do we see any basis for the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

3)  Disposition

13.  As the statutory requirements for giving leave to appeal are not met, the intended appeal has no merit and there is no basis for us to extend the time for the filing of the notice of motion. Accordingly, we dismiss the notice of motion.

14.  We would also according to the applicant’s request for dismissal of appeal filed on 24 March 2025 dismiss the applicant’s notice of motion filed on 28 January 2025.