Re Usman Gani

CACV 127/2020

[2021] HKCA 29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 127 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 263/2017)

________________________

________________________

Before: Hon Lam VP, Chu and Pang JJA in Court

Date of Judgment: 7 January 2020

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

Hon Pang JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.On 12 November 2020, the Applicant filed a Notice of Motion to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against this Court’s judgment of 5 November 2020. In that judgment we dismissed the Applicant’s appeal against the decision of Yau J on 14 May 2020 dismissing his application for 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.In his Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the CFA, the Applicant stated that he cannot go back to his home country because the danger is still there for him.  However, he did not raise any specific grounds for leave to appeal. 

4.Notwithstanding the acknowledgment by the Applicant on 12 November 2020 of the requirement under Practice Direction 2.1 and the direction of the Registrar of Civil Appeals of 16 November 2020, the Applicant has not lodged any written submissions in support of this application.

5.The Applicant has not raised any reasonably arguable ground of appeal on the merit of his claim, or any discernible or arguable ground for disturbing our judgment.  The matters raised in his Notice of Motion do not identify any specific error in our judgment or the judgment of the court below.

6.In any event, in the circumstances, we do not consider that there is any question of great general or public importance or which otherwise ought to be submitted to the CFA for determination.

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

The applicant acting in person