RE NAMBUKARA TANTRILAGE DON ASIRI CHARIT JAYASURIYA

CACV 282/2019

[2020] HKCA 513

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 282 OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 720 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Coleman J (giving the Judgment of the Court):

Introduction

1.  On 22 October 2019, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Zervos and Au JJA and Coleman J) of 8 October 2019, dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review.

2.  In his Notice of Motion the applicant set out the following grounds:

“I would kike to inform you that There is, small erer in this dicision and I like to say that I gave some important document regarding my refouelment interview. But all my disregard and gave me the dicision on my u.s.m appeal too. I am staying in hong kong from 2005-october up to now without see my family because of the problem and and scarred if I go my life become unserten some time to my life allso can happent to some like my father. Therefore I am seeking justice to protect my life. Thank you for kind help.” [sic]

3.  On 25 October 2019, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed that, pursuant to Practice Direction 2.1, the applicant shall lodge with the Court his written submissions on or before 5 November 2019.

4.  On 5 November 2019, the applicant filed written submissions.  The applicant essentially repeated his claim.  He said:

“I am writing this letter regarding the letter you sent me at 29^th of October 2019. Regarding my case and gave me the direction to submit my grounds to you before 05-11-2019 and I convey my thanks to you for this letter.

Therefore I like to say that I came here (hong kong) at 2005 and I lost my father for political problem sometime it could be happent to me too. Thatswhy I came here to save my life and I gave my suporting document too.

Then I need to give more document proof but I couldent take in time. Because my situation I have only my mother she cannot afford to take I will try my best to to take as soon as possible. I am not say any lie this is my real situation I never keep any touch with my relation too

In the other hand I have to say that my father was abducted and disappear too. But it was dien by nusliny party it was crystal clearer but nobody can take justice in Sri Lanka for such evident it could happent to me too.”

5.  These grounds and submissions essentially repeated the matters which the applicant put before the Board.  We do not think the application has merit.

6.  As was explained to the applicant in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the primary decision makers are the Director and the Board.  In non-refoulement cases, the Court will adopt an enhanced standard in scrutinizing the decision of the Board due to the seriousness of the issue at hand, the Court should nonetheless not usurp the role of the Board. Assessment of evidence, risk of harm, state protection and viability of internal relocation are primarily within the province of the Board and the Director.  The Court will not intervene by way of judicial review unless there are errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the decision of the Board.

7.  The applicant has failed to raise any question of great general or public importance that warrants submission to the Court of Final Appeal for consideration.  The criteria provided for under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484) have not been met.  Nor is there any reason for leave to be granted under the “or otherwise” limb.

8.  Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is dismissed.