Re Bachitar Singh
Read the full judgment text of CAMP 117/2019 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 16 April 2020.
2. Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) ( ‘ HKCFAO ’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.
Cited by 1 case
|
CAMP 117/2019 [2020] HKCA 129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 117 OF 2019 (ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 999 OF 2017) ________________________
________________________
________________________ D E C I S I O N ________________________ Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) : 1) Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal 1.1On 28 October 2019, this Court (Cheung JA and Au JA) gave the decision dismissing the applicant’s renewed application for an extension of time to appeal (‘extension decision’) against the decision of High Court Judge Campbell-Moffat given on 11 December 2018 in which she refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review. 1.2The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 8 November 2019, for leave to appeal against our extension decision to the Court of Final Appeal. 1.3Doing the best we could to interpret that applicant’s notice of notion, the applicant stated that he was applying to the Court for more time to solve his problem in his country. He stated that he was seeking for a favour and he would be grateful. 2) Legal principles 2.Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal. 3) Our view 3.1The matters stated by the applicant in his notice of motion do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal. The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO. Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters he has raised in his document. 3.2We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b). 4) Disposition 4.For these reasons, the notice of motion filed on 8 November 2019 is dismissed.
Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under CAMP 117/2019