Re Amagain Sapana

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 472/2018 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 30 January 2019.

1. On 19 December 2018 Deputy High Court Judge Lam refused to extend time to the applicant’s late application for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) dismissing her appeal/petition regarding her non-refoulement claim upon finding her delay of more than nine months excessive and without good reason, that none of the grounds put forward by her as reasonably arguable, and that there was no prospect of success in her intended applicatio

Cited by 1 case

Case No.HCAL 472/2018[2019] HKCFI 272
Court
High Court CFI
Date30 Jan 2019
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL 472/2018

[2019] HKCFI 272

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST
NO 472 OF 2018

______________

RE:
  AMAGAIN SAPANA Applicant

______________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan in Chambers
Date of Decision: 30 January 2019

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

1.On 19 December 2018 Deputy High Court Judge Lam refused to extend time to the applicant’s late application for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) dismissing her appeal/petition regarding her non-refoulement claim upon finding her delay of more than nine months excessive and without good reason, that none of the grounds put forward by her as reasonably arguable, and that there was no prospect of success in her intended application.

2.The applicant now by a summons issued on 2 January 2019 seeks leave to appeal against that decision, and in considering whether to grant leave to appeal, the Court will have regard to the prospect of the intended appeal.

3.However, neither in her summons or her supporting affirmation did the applicant provide any draft or proposed ground for her appeal, or any particulars as to any error in that decision or why it was considered as unfair or unreasonable, and despite claiming in her affirmation to have a good ground of appeal which she never elaborated, she merely repeated her disagreement with the earlier decisions of the Director and the Board insteadof trying to identify any error in the learned judge’s decision, in the absence of which I am unable to see any prospect of success in her intended appeal.  

4.In the premises it would be futile to grant leave to what seems to me a hopeless appeal, and I therefore refuse her application and dismiss her summons accordingly.

 
 

  (Bruno Chan)
  Deputy High Court Judge

The applicant acted in person

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 472/2018