Re Salwant Singh
Read the full judgment text of CACV 164/2019 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 2 October 2019.
1. On 19 July 2019, the Court (Lam Ag CJHC and Andrew Chan J) handed down a judgment ( [2019] HKCA 805 ) dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam given on 19 March 2019 ( [2019] HKCFI 684 ). In the latter decision, the judge refused leave for the applicant to apply for judicial review.
Cited by 6 cases · Cites 2 cases
|
CACV 164/2019 [2019] HKCA 1083 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO 164 OF 2019 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 773/2017) ________________________
________________________
________________________ J U D G M E N T ________________________ Hon Lam Ag CJHC (giving the Judgment of the Court): 1.On 19 July 2019, the Court (Lam Ag CJHC and Andrew Chan J) handed down a judgment ([2019] HKCA 805) dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam given on 19 March 2019 ([2019] HKCFI 684). In the latter decision, the judge refused leave for the applicant to apply for judicial review. 2.In his notice of motion dated 25 July 2019 seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, the applicant stated that he had problem in his own country and requested this Court to allow him to further proceed with his case. He hoped that he would be allowed to stay in Hong Kong until the problem in his country was solved. 3.The applicant also lodged his written submissions on 7 August 2019 reiterating his predicament. 4.At [15] – [18] of the judgment, the Court explained that there was no viable ground to reverse the judge’s decision. The applicant failed to engage with the Court’s reasons. We cannot see any reasonably arguable basis that the Court was wrong in this respect. 5.Having reviewed the materials before us, we cannot discern any question of great general or public importance, as required under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484). Nor can we see any basis for leave to be granted on the “otherwise” limb. Accordingly, the statutory thresholds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal are not met. 6.For these reasons, we refuse to grant leave to the applicant to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. We dismiss the notice of motion accordingly.
The applicant acting in person |
Cases cited in this judgment
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CACV 164/2019