RE MD HASNAIN

CAMP 74/2022, [2023] HKCA 1199

On Appeal From [2021] HKCFI 2141

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 74 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 2988 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

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

1.  On 17 October 2022, this Court handed down the decision ([2022] HKCA 1532) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal an order of Deputy High Court Judge P Li given on 22 July 2021.

2.  On 20 March 2023, the applicant filed a notice of motion applying for leave to appeal this Court’s order to the Court of Final Appeal out of time.  The applicant has not lodged any written submission.

3.  Having considered the applicant’s notice of motion, 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.

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

5.  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.

6.  The applicant’s present application is out of time by over four months.  The applicant did not explain his delay.

7.  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.

8.  The applicant’s notice of motion stated that he does not want to return as his life is still in danger and there was a person deported from Hong Kong to his or her home country and was killed.

9.  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.

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

11.  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.