Re Chinnasamy Karthik

HCAL 380/2019

[2021] HKCFI 1625

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 380 OF 2019

_____________

_____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.The applicant filed Form 86 dated 11 February 2019 for application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Decision dated 1 February 2019 of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”)

2.By affirmation dated 7 April 2021, the applicant applied to this Court to withdraw his judicial review application, saying that he did not have any problem in his country.

3.It is clear that the applicant has no intention of proceeding with his application.  As such, his application should be dismissed.

4.Accordingly, by an Order dated 14 April 2021(“the Order”), I acceded to the applicant’s request and dismissed his application.

5.By summons dated 10 May 2021, the applicant applied for extension of time to appeal against the Order.

6.In his affirmation in support of his application, he said that he did not want to return home.  He had not stated the reasons why he changed his mind.

7.In Re Adumekwe Rowland Ejike [2019] HKCA 702, the Court of Appeal held:

“19. The prospect of success of the intended appeal is important: the court will not grant extension for a hopeless appeal to be pursued, see Re Rahman Wasif [2019] HKCA 299 at [13]; Re Kpamou Gbotoi Bernard [2019] HKCA 168; and Re Irshad Muhammad [2018] HKCA 864 at [16].”

8.Since the Order was made upon the applicant’s application, there is no reasonable chance that he will succeed in his intended appeal.  I therefore dismiss his application.