Re Minque Mary Ann Dalumpines
Read the full judgment text of CACV 114/2018 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 28 September 2018.
1. On 23 July 2018 we handed down our judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan given on 13 April 2018 refusing her leave to apply for judicial review.
Cited by 1 case
|
CACV 114/2018 [2018] HKCA 625 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 114 OF 2018 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 813 of 2017) ________________________
________________________ Before: Hon Cheung, Chu and Barma JJA in Court Date of Judgment: 28 September 2018 ________________ JUDGMENT ________________ Hon Chu JA (giving the Judgment of the Court): 1.On 23 July 2018 we handed down our judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan given on 13 April 2018 refusing her leave to apply for judicial review. 2.By a Notice of Motion dated 1 August 2018, the applicant applied for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. 3.Despite directions given by the Registrar of Civil Appeals on 10 August 2018, the applicant has not put in any written submission to support her application. She is accordingly deemed to be relying only on the representations made in the Notice of Motion. 4.Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484, 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. 5.The only ground in the Notice of Motion is that the applicant could not go back to her home country at this point because her life would not be safe there, and it is requested that the applicant may be allowed to stay in Hong Kong until her problem is solved. 6.What has been stated in the Notice of Motion relates only to the personal circumstances of the applicant, and does not involve any question of great, general or public importance. There is also no other reason for submitting the proposed appeal to the Court of Final Appeal for decision. 7.In the circumstances, the condition for giving leave to appeal is not met. Accordingly, we dismiss the Notice of Motion.
The applicant, unrepresented, acted in person. |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 114/2018