Re Ali Hasnain

CACV 420/2019

[2020] HKCA 642

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 420 OF 2019

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 827 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

1.1.On 29 April 2020, this Court handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Josiah Lam given on 15 August 2019 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review (‘Decision of the Judge’).

1.2.The 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.

1.3.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion dated 13 May 2020, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

1.4.In the applicant’s notice of motion, the applicant complained that our judgment had no substance. He complained that he did not voice out about the poor performance of his duty lawyer for fear of being picked out. He complained that he did not have time to deal with his document bundle.

1.5.The applicant provided a supporting affirmation in which he stated that the Courts were wrong when they held there was no state acquiescence and the Courts did not find out details of the current situation in Pakistan.

1.6.The applicant provided written submissions that referred to legal authorities that are frequently used in non-refoulement cases.

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, supporting affirmation and written submissions 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 documents.

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 13 May 2020 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person