Case Document

100%Judiciary

CACV 252/2018

[2019] HKCA 108

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 252 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 1110/2017)

__________________________

RE:

FARUK MD

Applicant

__________________________

Before: Hon Lam VP, Kwan and McWalters JJA in Court

Date of Written Submissions: 6 November 2018

Date of Judgment: 24 January 2019

________________

JUDGMENT

________________

Hon Lam VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.By our judgment dated 18 October 2018 (published as [2018] HKCA 693), we dismissed the applicant’s appeal from the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam given on 12 June 2018 (published as [2018] HKCFI 1256) refusing leave to apply for judicial review.

2.In his notice of motion filed on 25 October 2018, the applicant sought leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on the following ground:

“ I would like to inform to court. There is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just relied col information and my Previous facts which were favor on reject my claim. Actual life occur different situation then mentioned col information. Officer and courts prefers to ignore the overwhelming of the evidence of the violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The decision is batray a bias and formula approached unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly calculate to reject my claims.” (sic)

3.In his written submissions lodged on 6 November 2018, the applicant stated that his life was in danger in his home country and then gave a factual narrative of his case. His account in this regard had been advanced before the Director and the Board. Those matters had been duly considered by the judge and this court.

4.As indicated in our judgment, we dismissed the applicant’s appeal on the ground that he failed to put forth any effective argument that could reverse the judge’s decision. In this application, the applicant failed to address our reasons for so holding, let alone demonstrating we were wrong in that regard. In our view, nothing in the notice of motion or the applicant’s written submissions can merit submission to the Court of Final Appeal for determination.

5.The applicant did not raise any question of great general or public importance. There is no basis to grant leave on the “or otherwise” limb. The statutory criterion for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is therefore not met: section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484).

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