Case Document

100%Judiciary

CAMP 193/2020

[2021] HKCA 716

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 193 OF 2020

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 624 OF 2018)

________________________

RE:

MANJU

Applicant

________________________

Before : Hon Cheung and Chu JJA in Court

Date of Decision : 14 May 2021

________________________

D E C I S I O N

________________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) :

1) Renewed application for extension of time to appeal

1.1On 12 April 2018, the applicant issued his application for leave for judicial review by Form 86 against the decisions of the Director of Immigration and Torture Claims Appeal Board (‘the Board’). The applicant’s application was late being outside of the three‑month requirement under the Rules of the High Court (Cap. 4A) Order 53, rule 4 as the Board’s Decision was handed down on 23 June 2017. Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan refused the application on 21 May 2020 (‘Judge’s Decision’). The Judge’s Decision stated that before the current action in HCAL 624/2018, there was a previous Form 86 application by the applicant in HCAL 422/2017, where on 28 March 2018 Deputy High Court Judge Woodcock refused the applicant’s application for leave for judicial review. The applicant did not appeal in HCAL 422/2017 but chose to take out another Form 86 in the current action in HCAL 624/2018. This was clearly an abuse of process and the principle of res judicata applied. The Judge struck out and dismissed the application.

1.2Subsequently, the applicant made an application by summons on 8 June 2020 for leave to appeal against the Judge’s Decision out of time. On 16 September 2020, the Judge dismissed the applicant’s application (‘Judge’s Leave Decision’). On 22 October 2020 and out of time under Order 59, rule 2B(3), the applicant made a further application to this Court for what is essentially a renewed application for extension of time to appeal against the Judge’s Decision: Tang Chai On v Tang Sing Ki [2016] 5 HKLRD 104 at [3] to [8].

2) Our view

2. It is not necessary to consider the applicant’s renewed application for extension of time to appeal because it is clearly an abuse of process for the applicant to commence another judicial review on the same issue when his previous application had already been dismissed. In the circumstances we will strike out the application and dismissed the summons dated 22 October 2020.