RE DHESSI GURCHARANJEET SINGH

CACV 336/2021, [2023] HKCA 570

On Appeal From [2021] HKCFI 1745

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 336 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1256 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 4 November 2022 ([2022] HKCA 1634) dismissing the applicant’s application for relief from sanction for failing to observe an “unless order” dated 20 August 2021 (“the Unless Order”) whereby he was required to lodge two sets of appeal bundles for his appeal from the order of DHCJ Bruno Chan (“the judge”) given on 17 June 2021 in which the judge refused to grant him an extension of time to apply for leave for judicial review and dismissed the leave application in respect of his non-refoulement claim.

2.  The facts and issues in the application 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 9 November 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 contains the following grounds of appeal:

“I would like to inform to Court of Final Appeal. I am disagree with the decision maker authorities the decision made by Director of Immigration as well as the Torture Claims Appeal Board. I do not think my case has been determined fairly.”

5.  In compliance with the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals made on 9 November 2022, the applicant lodged his written submissions on 23 November 2022.  As it is appropriate to do so, the Notice of Motion is determined on paper without an oral hearing.

6.  In the applicant’s written submissions, he stated his disagreement with the decisions made by the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board, and said that it was difficult for him as an unrepresented litigant to pursue his non-refoulement claim without proper legal and language assistance, which he said amounted to procedural unfairness.

7.  Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (“HKCFAO”) (Cap. 484) 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 failed to point to any error in our judgment.  The grounds of appeal in the Notice of Motion and the written submissions did not engage with the reasons given in our judgment in refusing to grant relief from sanction of the Unless Order.

9.  Having regard to the judgment of this court, the applicant’s intended appeal has no merit at all. No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.     

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

11.  By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 9 November 2022 is dismissed.