Read the full judgment text of HCAL 224/2017 on BabelCite. This Court of First Instance judgment was delivered on 5 June 2019 before Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan.
Administrative law – judicial review – leave to apply for judicial review – non-refoulement claim – Torture Claims Appeal Board – extension of time for leave to appeal – whether to grant extension where applicant is litigant in person – applicant's non-refoulement claim dismissed by Torture Claims Appeal Board and leave to apply for judicial review refused on 29 March 2018 – applicant filed summons on 20 March 2019 seeking leave to appeal out of time, more than 10 months beyond the 14-day period under Order 53, rule 3(4) of the Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A – applicant blamed ignorance of the rules and failure to receive the decision because he had changed his address without informing the court – whether ignorance of the law is a valid reason for delay – held, ignorance of the law cannot be accepted as a valid reason for delay – whether failure to update the court of a change of address excuses delay – held, the duty to provide an address for service rests on the litigant, and the consequence of any delay occasioned by the applicant's own failure to inform the court of his change of address falls squarely on him – whether the intended appeal has any prospect of success – held, no – applicant provided no draft or proposed grounds of appeal and at the hearing conceded he had no valid ground, relying merely on a hope that a friend would later find further evidence to support his claim – an intended appeal based on mere hope does not reveal any realistic prospect of success, and it is not for the court to review non-refoulement claims – four-factor test for extending time considered: length of delay, reasons for delay, prospects of intended appeal, and prejudice to respondent – extension of time would be futile for what appears to be a hopeless appeal – application refused and summons dismissed
Legal issues: Whether to extend time for leave to appeal against a decision refusing leave to apply for judicial review
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal out of time refused; summons dismissed
Cited by 1 case