Re Khatun Mst Asma
Read the full judgment text of HCAL 89/2018 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 23 August 2019.
1. On 19 July 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”) dismissing her appeal regarding her non-refoulement claim upon finding none of the grounds put forward by her reasonably arguable for her intended challenge, that there was no error of law or procedural unfairness in the process before the Board or in its decision, and that there was no reasonable prospect of success in her intended applicatio
Cites 1 case
|
HCAL 89/2018 [2019] HKCFI 2132 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST NO 89 OF 2018
Before: Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan in Chambers Date of Hearing: 23 August 2019 Date of Decision: 23 August 2019 Date of Reasons for Decision: 29 August 2019 ________________________ REASONS FOR DECISION ________________________ 1.On 19 July 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”) dismissing her appeal regarding her non-refoulement claim upon finding none of the grounds put forward by her reasonably arguable for her intended challenge, that there was no error of law or procedural unfairness in the process before the Board or in its decision, and that there was no reasonable prospect of success in her intended application. 2.The applicant now by a summons dated 5 August 2019 seeks leave to file her notice of appeal against that decision out of time, as the 14-day period for her to do so under Order 53, rule 3(4) of the Rules of the High Court, Cap 4A was thought to have ended on 2 August 2019, and hence she believed she was late by three days with her notice of appeal. 3.However, Order 3, rule 3 of the Rules of the High Court provides that the period of the Summer Vacation shall be excluded in reckoning any period prescribed by these rules or by any order or direction for serving, filing or amending any pleading, and hence in the applicant’s case, the period of the Summer Vacation which begins on 1 August and ends on 31 August would be excluded in reckoning the 14-day period for her to file her notice of appeal in between, and hence she is not late and will not be so up to 2 September 2019, of which she was advised accordingly at the hearing of her summons. In the premises it was not necessary for me to deal with her application other than to just allow her to withdraw it, which I did accordingly.
The applicant appeared in person | |||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 89/2018