Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 2116/2018

[2021] HKCFI 663

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 2116 OF 2018

_____________

RE:

FRANCIA NERRY VELASCO

Applicant

_____________

Before:

Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan in Chambers

Date of Decision:

23 March 2021

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.On 12 November 2020 I refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“Board”) in dismissing her appeal regarding her non-refoulement claim upon finding none of the grounds put forward by her reasonably arguable for her intended challenge, that there was no error of law or procedural unfairness in the process before the Director of Immigration or the Board or in their decisions, and that there was no reasonable prospect of success in her intended application.

2.The applicant now by a summons issued on 27 November 2020 seeks extension of time to appeal against that decision, as the 14-day period for her to file her appeal under Order 53 rule 3(4) of the Rules of High Court, Cap 4A was taken by the Registry to have expired on 26 November 2020, and hence she was late by 1 day with her intended appeal.

3.In considering whether to extend time for appealing against a decision refusing leave to apply for judicial review, the court shall have regard to (i) the length of the delay; (ii) the reason for the delay; (iii) the prospect of the intended appeal; and (iv) the prejudice to the respondent if an extension of time were granted: see Re MK HCMP 2609/2016, 10 January 2017; Chu On Fong Winter v The Appeal Panel (Housing) HCMP 982/2017, 20 July 2017; Islam Raja Rais v Director of Immigration HCMP 881/2017, 26 June 2017; Re Gurung Min Bahadur [2018] HKCA 226; and Re Saqlain Muhammad [2018] HKCA 346.

4.In the applicant’s case, a delay of 1 day cannot on any view be regarded as significant, for which she did not provide any explanation in her supporting affirmation other than the fact that she just missed the deadline, but taking into account of the fact that she is unrepresented, and the possibility of some delay to her receiving the decision in the mail caused by the Covid-19 pandemic which had affected the postal service for most part of 2020, I am prepared to exercise discretion in her favor by dealing with her summons on paper so as to save time and expenses, and by extending time for her to file her notice of appeal within 14 days of this order.