Re Sari Eri Aellia

CAMP 127/2019

[2020] HKCA 137

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 127 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 296 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

Before :  Hon Cheung, Yuen and Barma 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)  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.1On 13 November 2019, this Court (Cheung JA and Barma JA) gave the decision dismissing the applicant’s renewed application for an extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Woodcock given on 25 August 2017 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 18 November 2019, for leave to appeal against our extension decision to the Court of Final Appeal.

1.3Doing the best we can, the applicant stated in the notice of motion that although her case may not be strong, it was important for the Judge to listen to her side of the story and allow her to provide more information and argument about her case.  She stated that instead only the Immigration Department’s decision was given weight.  She complained about unfairness.

1.4In non-compliance with the order of the Registrar of Civil Appeals dated 20 November 2019, the applicant failed to lodge her written submissions by 2 December 2019.  This application is determined on paper based on the applicant’s notice of motion filed on 18 November 2019.

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 her notice of motion do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal.  She 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 she has raised in the notice of motion.

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 18 November 2019 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person