Case Document

100%Judiciary

CACV 137/2018

[2018] HKCA 724

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 137 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 482/2017)

________________

MUHAMMAD USMAN

Applicant

________________

Before: Hon Cheung CJHC, Barma and Poon JJA

Date of Judgment: 22 October 2018

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

Hon Cheung CJHC (giving the judgment of the court):

1.By our judgment dated 2 August 2018 (Cheung CJHC and Barma JA, [2018] HKCA 474), we dismissed the applicant’s appeal from the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 20 April 2018 ([2018] HKCFI 793) refusing leave to apply for judicial review.

2.In his notice of motion dated 3 September 2018, the applicant gave these grounds for seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal:

“I would like to inform Court of Appeal there is some error in law decision. Decision maker just relied COI information and my previous facts which were favor on reject my claim. Actual life occur different situation then mentioned COI information. The decision is betray a [illegible] and formula approach unlikely fair access the danger of my life and clearly calculate to reject my claim my concern in the attached affirmation exhibit. Please look into my matter thank you very much for your understanding about my case and about my situation. Bundle of thanks.” (sic)

3.In his affirmation dated 31 August 2018 filed together with his notice of motion, the applicant stated that he did not agree with the adjudicator’s decision, claimed that his life was in danger in his home country, and said that he did not want to return to his home country. He exhibited to his affirmation a copy of our judgment dated 2 August 2018, as well as previous copy documents already placed before us for the purpose of the appeal.

4.It is plain that the applicant’s notice of motion and supporting affirmation only raise case‑specific matters, but involve no issues of great general or public importance – the statutory criterion for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal: section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484).

5.In any event, for the reasons we gave in our judgment, we do not consider there is any merit in the applicant’s intended application for judicial review.

6.There is no basis to grant leave on the “or otherwise” limb.

7.Accordingly, we dismiss the application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.