RE IQBAL MUHAMMAD ASIF

CAMP 282/2021

[2022] HKCA 68

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 282 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 1574 OF 2018)

__________________________

__________________________

________________

JUDGMENT

________________

Hon Chu JA giving the Judgment of the Court:

1.  On 25 October 2021, this Court handed down our judgment[1] refusing to give leave to the applicant to appeal out of time against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Lung given on 4 June 2020 refusing him leave to apply for judicial review.     

2.  On 16 December 2021, the applicant filed a notice of motion and an affirmation to apply for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  Despite directions given by the Registrar of Civil Appeals, he has not lodged any written submission to support his application.

3.  Having considered the notice of motion and affirmation, 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.  Section 24(2) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, 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.  Under section 24(5), the Court of Appeal may extend the time for the filing of the notice of motion.

5.  The applicant’s application is late by more than three weeks.  While he apologised for the delay in the affirmation, he has not provided any explanation for the delay.        

6.  We turn next to consider the merits of the application.  The background to this case and the applicant’s claim have been set out in our judgment.  We will not repeat them.

7.  Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, 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.  In the notice of motion, the applicant only stated that he wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal after his judicial review application was refused and his application to the Court of Appeal was also dismissed.  He has not provided any ground in support of his application for leave to appeal.        

9.  We are of the view that there is no proper basis to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  Importantly, it has not been shown that the intended appeal involves a question of great general or public importance, as required by section 22(1)(b).  We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the “otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

10.  As the statutory requirements for giving leave to appeal are not met, the application for leave to appeal is bound to fail.  In the circumstances, it is futile to extend the time for making the application.  Accordingly, we refuse to extend the time for applying for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the notice of motion.