Re Awolor Anthony Toyin

CAMP 146/2019

[2020] HKCA 103

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 146 OF 2019

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 587 OF 2017)

________________________

________________________

Before : Hon Cheung, Chu and Au 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

1.1.On 23 October 2019, this Court (Cheung JA and Chu 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 June 2018 in which she refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

1.2.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 29 October 2019, for leave to appeal against our extension decision to the Court of Final Appeal.

1.3.The applicant stated in his notice of motion that the judges did not understand his problem.  He stated that people are dying every day in Nigeria and it is not safe for him to return.

1.4.In his written submissions, he stated that he abandoned his family in Nigeria by coming to Hong Kong because his life was important to him.  He stated that he provided evidence of his brother who had been attacked by his enemies but the Court did not consider such evidence.  He said the internet has proof that there is abuse in Nigeria.  He stated that the government has no control of the terrorist groups in Nigeria.  He stated that his enemies are still looking for him.  He stated that he is now married in Hong Kong and produced his marriage certificate.

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

3.1.The 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 notice of motion.

3.2.We 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 dated 29 October 2019 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person