Re Dhali Jony

CACV 104/2019

[2019] HKCA 944

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 104 OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 342 OF 2018)

____________

____________

Before: Hon Kwan VP, Hon Chu JA and Hon Pang JA in Court

Date of Written Submissions: 6 August 2019

Date of Judgment: 28 August 2019

____________________

J U D G M E N T

____________________

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

1.The applicant applies for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal in respect of our judgment handed down on 10 July 2019 ([2019] HKCA 755) dismissing his appeal against the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim.

Background

2.By a Notice of Decision dated 10 November 2015 and a Notice of Further Decision dated 12 June 2017, the Director of Immigration (“the Director”) rejected the applicant’s claim.

3.The applicant appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board(“the Board”) against the Director’s decisions and his appeal was dismissed by the Board on 7 February 2018.

4.He filed a Form 86 on 5 March 2018 to seek leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Board.  His application was refused by Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam on 21 February 2019.

5.The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal against the decision of the Judge on 4 March 2019.  The appeal was heard on 25 June 2019.  It was dismissed by this Court on 10 July 2019 in that there was no merit in the appeal and that there was no prospect of success in the intended application for judicial review.

6.The applicant filed a Notice of Motion on 23 July 2019 for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and lodged his written submissions on 6 August 2019.

Grounds of Appeal

7.In the said Notice of Motion, the applicant stated that he was not satisfied with the Court’s judgment and that we did not “write any good cause for refusing his claim”.

8.In his written submissions dated 6 August 2019, he reiterated the background of his case and complained about the lack of legal assistance in the appellate stage.  He submitted that the Director and the Board did not consider his claim “as per law”, and that they had “no practical knowledge about his claim” and “did not visit Bangladesh to investigate”.

Discussion & Disposal

9.Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed on 24 July 2019 that the Notice of Motion be determined on paper without oral hearing. This we now do.

10.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.

11.Neither of the applicant’s grounds of appeal nor his written submissions constitute valid grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  He has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b).  There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

12.We, therefore, dismiss the applicant’s application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person.