Re Lama Bikash

HCAL 247/2018

[2019] HKCFI 851

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 247 OF 2018

______________

______________

___________________

D E C I S I O N

___________________

1.On 25 January 2019 I refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board(“the Board”) in dismissing his appeal/petition regarding his non-refoulement claim upon finding none of the grounds put forward by him as reasonably arguable or with any prospect of success in his intended application.

2.The applicant now by a summons issued on 15 February 2019 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 Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A ended on 8 February 2019, and hence he was late by seven days.

3.In considering whether to extend time for appealing against a decision refusing leave to apply for judicial review, the Court will have regard to (1) the length of the delay; (2) the reasons for the delay; (3) the prospect of the intended appeal; and (4) the prejudice to the respondent if an extension of time were granted.

4.In the applicant’s case a delay of seven days may not be regarded as very significant or excessive, for which he explained at the hearing that he received the decision late and was unable to file his notice of appeal on time until after the deadline of 8 February 2019 due to the intervening Chinese New Year Holiday.  Given that the three-day holiday from 5 – 7 February 2019 happened to have just preceded the deadline, I am prepared to accept the applicant’s explanation for his delay.  

5.However, he did not 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 at the hearing of his summons he conceded that he has no valid ground to appeal, but as his problems back home have still not been resolved, he just wants to be allowed to remain in Hong Kong a bit longer until the resolution of his problems. As such and in the absence of any reasonably arguable ground, I am unable to see any prospect of success in his intended appeal.

6.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.

The applicant appeared in person