Re Ali Md Liakat

CACV 145/2018

[2018] HKCA 879

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 718 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

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

1)   Leave to appeal to Court of Final Appeal

1.1On 22 August 2018, this Court handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Woodcock given on 4 May 2018 in which she refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.  The applicant had sought to review the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (‘the Board’) dismissing his appeal from a decision of the Director of Immigration (‘the Director’) who had rejected his non‑refoulement claim.

1.2The facts and issues in the appeal, as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment.  We will not repeat them here.

1.3The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion dated 6 September 2018, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

1.4The applicant stated in his Notice of Motion that :

‘ - The claims that the judgment has made stated is no substance in the grounds of the application is not true.

-  On the strength of the grounds not made a complain about the poor performance of his duty lawyer is due of fearing he will be picked out for misappropriating by the adjudicator.

-  The applicant gently did not have enough time to address the bundle.

-  Rest of grounds I will submit as soon as possible.’

1.5The applicant’s supporting affirmation dated 6 September 2018 stated that :

‘ …I disagree with this decision from the court court of appeal date 22/08/2018 the decision is unreasonable and unfair to me which I can’t agree with the decision ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT A’

1.6In non-compliance with the orders of the Registrar of Civil Appeals dated 10 September 2018 and 20 September 2018, the applicant failed to lodge his written submissions by 8 October 2018.  This application is determined on paper based on the applicant’s Notice of Motion and supporting affirmation both filed on 6 September 2018.

2)  Legal principles

2.Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

3)  Our View

3.1The matters stated by the applicant in his Notice of Motion and supporting affirmation do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with Section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.  Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters he has raised in his Notice of Motion and supporting affirmation.

3.2We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

4)  Disposition

4.For these reasons, the Notice of Motion dated 6 September 2018 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person