RE ADIL KHAWAJA

CAMP 391/2022, [2024] HKCA 672

On Appeal From [2022] HKCFI 1432

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 391 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 924 OF 2019)

________________________

________________________

________________________

DECISION

________________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) :

1.  On 12 June 2023, this Court handed down judgment ([2023] HKCA 737) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal the order of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung given on 30 May 2022 refusing his application for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non-refoulement claim.

2.  On 27 June 2023, the applicant filed a notice of motion applying for leave to appeal this Court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

3.  Pursuant to the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals also dated 27 June 2023, the applicant was to lodge and serve on or before 11 July 2023 written submissions failing which he will be deemed to have abandoned his right to rely on written submissions and the matter will be considered by this Court based on the available materials. The applicant has not lodged or served written submission by the stipulated deadline.

4.  Having considered the applicant’s notice of motion, we see no reason to depart from the usual practice of determining applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on paper without an oral hearing. We have, therefore, proceeded to determine the applicant’s application on the basis of the documents in the case.

5.  The background to this case and the applicant’s claim have been set out in our judgment. We will not repeat them.

6.  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.

7.  The notice of motion stated that :

‘ THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND THE APPEAL BOARD DISMISSED MY CLAIM. I AM NOT SATISFY WITH THEIR JUDGMENT. I WANT TO GO TO THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL FOR MY JUDICIAL REVIEW.’

8.  We are of the view that no question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.

9.  Nor do we see any basis for the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

10.  As the statutory requirements for giving leave to appeal are not met, we, accordingly, dismiss the notice of motion.