DINH THI HAI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CACV 51/2023, [2023] HKCA 900

On Appeal From [2023] HKCFI 269

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 51 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2568 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

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

1.  On 12 June 2023, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”)  dismissing the Applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 10 February 2023 refusing to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office dated 20 September 2018, whereby the Board dismissed the Applicant’s appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 20 December 2017 rejecting her non-refoulement claim.

2.  By Notice of Motion dated 19 June 2023, the Applicant applied for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the Applicant repeated her claim that she would be tortured, beaten or even killed by her creditor if she returned to Vietnam. She disagreed with the Director that she could relocate to live in another part of Vietnam away from her home, and alleged that the Director failed to consider her human rights.  She failed to identify any error in the CA Judgment, or raise any valid or proper ground of appeal against the CA Judgment.

3.  The Applicant has failed to lodge written submissions in support of her application contrary to the directions given by the Registrar of Civil Appeals on 19 June 2023.

4.  Under s 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal in any civil cause or matter if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal (as the case may be), 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.

5.  No question of great general or public importance involved in the proposed appeal is identified in the Notice of Motion.  We are unable to see any such question being involved in the proposed appeal.  We are satisfied that the intended appeal has no merits and no reasonable prospect of success.  There is also no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “or otherwise” limb in s 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

6.  Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion is dismissed.