Nguyen Tuan Cuong and Another v. The Director of Immigration and Others

CACV000196A/1995

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1995 No. 196
(Civil)

-------------------

Coram: Bokhary, Mortimer and Mayo, JJ.A. in Court

Date of Hearing: 8 March 1996

Date of Judgment: 8 March 1996

----------------------

J U D G M E N T

-----------------------

Bokhary, J.A.:

1. It is difficult to identify any disputed legal principle which would arise in this proposed appeal. But the relevant part of the Order in Council does include the formula "or otherwise" And this, in our view, is a case of such a dimension that leave to appeal is appropriate even if no disputed legal principle arises. A very large number of persons are concerned; and they are concerned in a sense vital to them. We must hesitate of course to exercise our discretion so as to force upon the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council an appeal in which we are unable to identify a disputed legal principle. But the formula "or otherwise" is there for a purpose; and we consider that the present case comes within it.

2. In those circumstances, we think it right to grant leave to appeal to Her Majesty in Council. Such leave at this stage is of course conditional. The usual conditions pertain to security for costs and the time for the dispatch of the record.

3. On such conditions and costs, we will now hear counsel.

[Submissions on Conditions and Costs]

4. No security for costs is sought, so none will be ordered. The time for the preparation and dispatch of record will be two months. And as far as the costs of this application is concerned, they will be in the appeal to Her Majesty in Council.

Representation:

Mr Philip Dykes (instructed by M/s Pam Baker & Co) for the applicant

Mr William Marshall QC & Ms D Watson (of the Attorney General's Chambers) for the respondent