Read the full judgment text of CAMP 160/2018 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 6 March 2019 before Cheung JA, Yuen JA, Chu JA.
Administrative law – judicial review – torture claim – non-refoulement – immigration – leave to apply for judicial review – leave to appeal – extension of time to appeal – applicant Indian national who overstayed in Hong Kong – torture claim on basis of threats from supporters of rival political party BJP – Director's rejection of BOR 3 and BOR 2 claims – Board's dismissal of appeal – Judge's refusal to grant leave to apply for judicial review – applicant sought to appeal out of time – whether application should be treated as application for leave to appeal against refusal to extend time – true nature of application – whether vacation period excluded from 14-day appeal period – August is summer vacation under s.31(1) of High Court Ordinance (Cap. 4) – time did not run in August – appeal period expired 14 September 2018 – Judge erred in finding a four-day delay – four conventional factors for extension of time – length of delay – reasons for delay – prospects of appeal – prejudice – applicant acted on advice from non-court person – no deliberate delay – discretion to extend time – Court of Appeal will not interfere unless discretion wrongly exercised – leave to appeal granted – extension of time granted – appeal allowed – applicant to file notice of appeal against the First Decision
Legal issues: True nature of the application and applicable procedure · Whether time for appeal ran during the August vacation · Whether to grant leave to appeal against the Further Decision · Whether to grant extension of time to appeal
Outcome: Application granted; leave to appeal granted; appeal against the Further Decision allowed; extension of time effectively granted; applicant to file a notice of appeal against the First Decision.
Cited by 16 cases · Cites 1 case