Re Butt Waqas Arif
Read the full judgment text of CACV 443/2018 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 2 April 2019.
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.
Cited by 1 case
|
CACV 443/2018 [2019] HKCA 406 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 443 OF 2018 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 121 OF 2018) ________________________
________________________
________________________ 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 February 2019, this Court (Cheung and Au JJA) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal (‘judgment’) against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam given on 3 September 2018 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review. 1.2The facts and issues in the appeal before the Court of 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 8 March 2019, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. We will deal with this application on paper. 1.4The applicant merely stated in his notice of motion that he would like to reject and review our judgment because he considered we have disregarded his dangerous situation. 1.5The applicant failed to lodge his written submissions by 22 March 2019 in non-compliance with the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals dated 11 March 2019. 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 do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal. The applicant has failed to identify any question of great 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. 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 8 March 2019 is dismissed.
Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 443/2018