Re Saleem Muhammad

CACV 335/2019

[2020] HKCA 566

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 335 OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 637/2018)

____________________

____________________

________________________

JUDGMENT

________________________

Hon Lam VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

Introduction

1.On 19 May 2020, the Applicant applied by Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against this Court’s (Lam VP and M Ng J) judgment of 23 April 2020.  In that judgment we dismissed the Applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan on 12 July 2019 refusing leave to apply for judicial review. 

2.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484 provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) at the discretion of this Court or the CFA if the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the CFA for decision.

3.The Applicant set out his grounds for leave to appeal in his Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the CFA.

4.The main thrust of his grounds for leave to appeal is that the language assistance the Applicant received was inadequate and it affected his ability to understand the case made against him and the decisions and judgments that were rendered.  He said it affected the fairness of the process.

5.The issue of language assistance was addressed in the judgment below at [12] and [13] and our judgment of 23 April 2020 at [15] – [17].  However, the Applicant has failed to pinpoint any error in, or grounds for reversing our analysis of this issue.

6.In our judgment, there is no question of great general or public importance in this case or which otherwise ought to be submitted to the CFA for decision. 

7.For these reasons, we refuse to grant leave to appeal to the CFA and we would dismiss the Applicant’s Notice of Motion accordingly.