RE BUTT MUHAMMAD USMAN

CACV 252/2021

[2022] HKCA 81

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 252 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1261 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon G Lam JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.  The applicant is a Pakistani national whose non-refoulement claim was rejected by the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board/adjudicator of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office. His application for leave for judicial review of the Board’s decision was rejected by Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan,[1] and his appeal against that decision was dismissed by this Court on 29 October 2021.[2]

2.  The relevant facts and procedural history and the reasons for dismissing the appeal have been set out in our previous judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.  The applicant now seeks, by Notice of Motion dated 16 December 2021, leave to appeal further to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the applicant simply stated that his claim was rejected, that the court refused leave to apply for judicial review, and that he wished to go to the Court of Final Appeal.

4.  Despite the acknowledgment by the Applicant on 16 December 2021 of the requirement under Practice Direction 2.1 and the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals on the same day, the Applicant has not lodged any written submissions in support of this application.  As is usual for this kind of application, we shall deal with it on the basis of the available documents.

5.  Having considered the materials available, we are not satisfied that there is any reasonable prospect of success in the intended appeal or any question involved which, by reason of its great general or public importance, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision, as required by section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484).  Nor do we see any reason why the applicant should, for some other reason, be allowed to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

6.  The Notice of Motion is therefore dismissed.