RE PANKAJ KUMAR

CACV 75/2021

[2022] HKCA 1407

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 75 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2398 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Yuen JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  This court handed down judgment on 25 February 2022 ([2022] HKCA 283)  dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an order of DHCJ P Li given on 19 February 2021 refusing to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review in respect of his non-refoulement claim (“the Judge’s Decision”).

2.  The facts and issues in the appeal before this court, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.  On 2 March 2022, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

4.  The Notice of Motion stated the following:

“With due respect and humble submissions I beg you that I am not agree with the decision of the Appeal Board because decision maker did not consider my application properly. The decision is not fair and this decision make me unhappy and make me irrational in my life. Decision makers relied just simply hearsay and this decision disappointed me in my life and made me liable to remove to the risk state, in my home country. If I return back to my home country I will be killed by my enemy, but the Torture Claims Appeal Board and the Immigration officer did not scrutinise my claim.”

5.  On 2 March 2022, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed that the applicant should lodge his written submissions on or before 16 March 2022.  By an order made by the Registrar on 17 March 2022, the applicant was allowed a 14-day extension of time to lodge his written submissions.  He lodged them on 25 April 2022 and we have taken them into consideration.  This Notice of Motion is determined on paper without an oral hearing, which we consider appropriate.

6.  The applicant simply repeated his written submissions lodged with this court on 10 May 2021 for his appeal against the Judge’s Decision as set out at [10] of our judgment and will not be repeated here.

7.  Section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance 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 has not engaged with the reasons in this court’s judgment.  No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by s.22(1)(b)  of the HKCFAO.

9.  Nor do we see any basis for leave under the “or otherwise” limb under s.22(1)(b).

10.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 2 March 2022 is dismissed.