Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 833/2017

[2019] HKCFI 758

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 833 OF 2017

______________

RE:

ISLAM MOHAMMAD AMIRUL

Applicant

______________

Before:

Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan in Chambers

Date of Decision:

26 March 2019

______________

D E C I S I O N

______________

1.On 31 August 2018 I refused to extend time to the applicant’s late filing of his application for leave to apply for judicial review of both the decisions of the Director of Immigration and of the Torture Claims Appeal Board in rejecting/dismissing his non-refoulement claim after having found no explanation from the applicant for his more than one month’s delay nor any merits or prospect of success in his intended challenge.

2.On 18 September 2018 the applicant applied by a summons forleave to appeal against that interlocutory order, but he was again late with his application as the 14-day period for him to do so under Order 59, rule 2B(1) of the Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A expired on 14 September 2018, and for which this Court has no power to extend time, his summons was accordingly dismissed on 29 October 2018: Wynn Resorts (Macau) SA v Mong Henry [2009] 5 HKC 515; and Menno Leendert Vos v Global Fair Industrial Ltd & Ors (unreported) HCA 4200/1995, 23 April 2010.

3.The applicant now by a summons dated 27 December 2018 seeks leave to appeal against that decision out of time, as the 14-day period for him to lodge his appeal under Order 53, rule 3(4) of the said Rules ended on 12 November 2018, and hence he was late by one and a half month, for which he again did not provide any explanation.

4.In considering whether to grant leave the Court will have regard to the prospect of the intended appeal, but neither in his summons or his supporting affirmation did he provide any draft or proposed ground for his appeal, or any particulars as to any error in the decision or why it was unreasonable or unfair, and I am unable to see any prospect of success in his intended appeal.

5.In the premises it would be futile to extend time for what appears to me a hopeless appeal. Accordingly I refuse his application for leave to appeal out of time, and dismiss his summons.