Md Akram Uz-zaman v. Wesley Wong, Esq. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CACV 397/2018

[2019] HKCA 464

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 397 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 1000 OF 2017)

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

Before: Hon Kwan VP, Cheung and Yuen JJA in Court

Date of Written Submission: 8 April 2019

Date of Judgment: 25 April 2019

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

Hon Yuen JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.This court handed down judgment on 13 February 2019 ([2019] HKCA 161) dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an order of DHCJ Bruno Chan (“the Judge”) given on 3 August 2018 refusing his application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non‑refoulement claim. The 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 and will not be repeated.

2.The applicant subsequently applied, by a Notice of Motion on 6 March 2019, for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and lodged his written submissions on 8 April 2019.

3.The applicant stated in his Notice of Motion that:

“I earnestly request [Honourable] Judge to protect me. If I am returned to my country, I would be harmed or killed by the supporter of rival political party, the Awami League and BNP [both] party or by the police for the false case charge brought against me. Police and RAB looking for me, my family, also my [relative]. My grandfather was killed in a terrorist [my against] party BNP and Purba Bangla Communist Party, which suspected was planned by rival BNP and when my Awami League refused to my assist my family to go after the BNP people so as to bring justice my grandfather death. I withdrew my membership from AL to join its rival party Purba Bangla Communist Party (PBCP) in the hope of seeking revenge against BNP.

Therefore, I kindly request the Honourable Judge to reconsider my case and allow me to stay in Hong Kong and provide me protection.”

4.The applicant’s written submission repeated the case which he had been advanced before the Judge.

5.The Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 8 March 2019 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  We agree it is appropriate to determine this application on paper.

6.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484 provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.

7.The applicant’s grounds stated in his Notice of Motion only repeated the factual allegations in his case and do not constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. 

8.No question of great general or public importance has been identified in the grounds in the Notice of Motion.

9.Nor do we see any basis for granting leave on the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

10.In the circumstances, we cannot find any basis for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

11.By virtue of the above, the Notice of Motion dated 6 March 2019 is dismissed.

The applicant acting in person