Re Aziz Nasir
Read the full judgment text of HCAL 1030/2017 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 29 October 2018.
1. On 14 September 2018 I refused to grant any extension of timefor the applicant’s late filing of his application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s decision in rejecting his non-refoulement claim upon finding no explanation from him for his more than six months of delay, or any good reason to extend time for such excessive delay, or any merits in his intended challenge, and accordingly dismissed his application.
Cited by 3 cases
|
HCAL 1030/2017 [2018] HKCFI 2382 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST NO 1030 OF 2017 ______________
______________
______________ D E C I S I O N ______________ 1.On 14 September 2018 I refused to grant any extension of timefor the applicant’s late filing of his application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s decision in rejecting his non-refoulement claim upon finding no explanation from him for his more than six months of delay, or any good reason to extend time for such excessive delay, or any merits in his intended challenge, and accordingly dismissed his application. 2.The applicant now by a summons issued on 26 September 2018 applies for leave under Order 59, rule 2B of the Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A to appeal against my decision, and exhibited to his supporting affirmation of the same date he provides some grounds of appeal which I can only surmise to mean as follows:
3.These are however just broad and vague assertions of the applicant without any particulars or specifics or relevant elaboration as to how I erred or failed to apply high standard of fairness in refusing to extend time for his late application, or how I failed to find that the Board had erred as asserted. In the premises I am not satisfied that there is any prospect of success in the applicant’s intended appeal, and I accordingly refuse to grant him leave to do so.
The applicant acted in person |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 1030/2017