Re Phagami Mangala Kumari

CACV 361/2019

[2020] HKCA 211

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 361 OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 42 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

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

1)  Leave to appeal to Court of Final Appeal

1.1On 10 December 2019, this Court (Cheung and Au JJA) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan given on 26 July 2019 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review (‘Decision of the Judge’).

1.2The facts and issues in the appeal before the Court of Appeal, as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment.  We will not repeat them here.

1.3The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion dated 13 December 2019, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  We will deal with the application on paper.

1.4The applicant stated in her notice of motion that she is not satisfied with our judgment and wishes to seek justice.  She believes that for the ‘great importance of the oppressed people the Court of Final Appeal will grant a correct order’.

1.5In the applicant’s written submission, she repeated her background information, her personal family conflicts, examples of certain state acquiescence, her dissatisfaction with the decisions of the Immigration Department, the Torture Claim Appeal Board and our judgment.  She submitted that she does not understand English nor Hong Kong law.

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 and written submission 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 she has raised in her notice of motion and written submissions.

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 dated 13 December 2019 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person