Re Nazakat Khan

CAMP 83/2020

[2021] HKCA 335

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 83 OF 2020

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 890 OF 2017)

_________________

________________

Before:  Hon Yuen, Barma and Au JJA in Court

Date of Written Submissions:  5 February 2021

Date of Judgment: 22 March 2021

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.This court (Hon Yuen and Barma JJA) handed down judgment on 12 January 2021 ([2021] HKCA 30) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal an order of Campbell-Moffat J (“the Judge”) given on 19 May 2020 refusing to give the applicant leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non‑refoulement claim.

2.On 4 June 2020, the applicant filed a summons for extension of time to appeal, which the Judge dismissed on 18 June 2020. 

3.On 6 July 2020, the applicant filed a summons in this court, which as mentioned earlier we dismissed on 12 January 2021.  The facts and issues in the intended appeal before this court, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

4.On 25 January 2021, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. 

5.The Notice of Motion contains the following grounds of appeal:

“I am late for apply due to lack of knowledge and insufficient sources. Please accept my filling application so that I can process my case further. I hope I will get your favour.”

6.On 27 January 2021, the Registrar of Civil Appeals directed that the applicant shall lodge his written submissions on or before 8 February 2021 and the applicant filed his written submissions accordingly.  The Registrar also directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing, which we consider appropriate.

7.In the applicant’s written submissions, he complained that the decisions made in respect of his non-refoulement protection claim were without regard to the dangerous situation he may face in his home country if refouled.  He stated that the Pakistani police were corrupt and he would not receive any protection or fair treatment from them.  He urged the Court to understand his difficult situation and let him stay in Hong Kong until it is safe for him to return home.  We have discussed these allegations in paragraph 13 of our judgment and he is simply repeating those allegations.

8.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted 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 Court of Final Appeal for decision.

9.The applicant’s intended appeal has no merits. No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by s.22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.     

10.Nor do we see any basis for the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

11.By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 25 January 2021 is dismissed.

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person