Re Mondal Entaj

CAMP 85/2019

[2020] HKCA 136

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 85 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 692 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

Before :  Hon Kwan VP, Cheung and Yuen JJA in Court

Date of Decision :  23 April 2020 

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) :

1.On 22 October 2019, this Court (Kwan VP and Cheung JA) handed down a decision dismissing the applicant’s application for an extension of time to appeal against the decision of High Court Judge Campbell-Moffat given on 5 July 2018 in which she refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

2.The facts and issues in the application before the Court of Appeal, as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it, were set out in our said decision.  We will not repeat them.

3.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion and an affirmation filed on 22 November 2019, for leave to appeal against our decision to the Court of Final Appeal out of time.  Contrary to the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals dated 25 November 2019, the applicant has failed to lodge written submissions by 6 December 2019.  We will deal with this application on the basis of the applicant’s notice of motion and affirmation filed.

4.Before the Court may grant an extension of time, good grounds have to be shown by the applicant, bearing in mind that he has already had his day in court twice when he makes the present application.  The relevant factors in considering whether extension of time should be given are the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, the merits of the proposed appeal and the prejudice to the other party.

5.Under section 24 of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’), if an application for extension of time to appeal is refused by the Court of Appeal, the applicant has 28 days from the date of refusal to file his or her notice of motion (i.e. by 19 November 2019).  The applicant is only a few days late and we will disregard his delay. 

6.In respect of the merits of the application the applicant stated in his notice of motion that our decision contained errors of law, that the decision maker relied on country of origin information to his disfavour, the courts ignored the overwhelming evidence of violence towards minorities and the Judge’s decision was biased.

7.The applicant in his affirmation explained the reason why he was late, but we have already accepted such delay so this is not an issue.  

8.Under section 22(1)(b) of the 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.

9.The matters stated by the applicant in his notice of motion and affirmation 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 it apparent to us that there is any such question in his notice of motion and affirmation.

10.We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

11.As the proposed appeal has no prospect of success, we refuse to extend time and dismiss the notice of motion filed on 22 November 2019.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person