Re Tran Van Phong

CACV 120/2021

[2022] HKCA 79

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 120 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2707 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

Before:  Hon G Lam and Chow JJA in Court

Date of Written Submissions:  6 December 2021

Date of Judgment:  14 January 2022

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon G Lam JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.The applicant is a Vietnamese national whose non-refoulement claim was rejected by the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board/adjudicator of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office. His application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s decision was rejected by Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung,[1] and his appeal against that decision was dismissed by this Court on 29 October 2021.[2]

2.The relevant facts and procedural history and the reasons for dismissing the appeal have been set out in our previous judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.The applicant now seeks, by Notice of Motion dated 2 December 2021, leave to appeal further to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the applicant stated:

“ 1. I am the Applicant in this case which is an appeal against the refusal by the Court of Appeal of my Application for leave for Judicial Review against the rejection of my appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (TCAB)  and Director of Immigration.

2. It was unsatisfactory that the Court of Appeal ruled in the judgement of Case No. CACV 120/2021 dated 29 October 2021 that I had no chance of success in reviewing the TCAB’s decision.

3. If I return to Vietnam, my life will be seriously threatened, probably even dead, because the creditors and gangsters in Vietnam are different from those in Hong Kong, most of them are cruel and violent. They disregard the law and are willing to kill people to satisfy their anger and ferocity.

4. Because I and the creditor have not yet agreed on a repayment plan, I request that my deportation be postponed. If I am forced to repatriate my life will be in danger and killed.

5. The problem regarding my appeal is that the Immigration Department did not consider my human rights under the Basic Law / Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act / International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights / International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Immigration Department ordered my deportation.

6.  Therefore, I ask the Court of Appeal to give me a chance to seek justice and help me get asylum in Hong Kong.  If the Hong Kong Government deports me to Vietnam, my life will be in danger.  I am sure that I will be killed by the creditor and the gangsters that lent me money.”

4.Pursuant to the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals under Practice Direction 2.1, this application will be dealt with on paper without an oral hearing.

5.In his submissions of 6 December 2021, besides reiterating the procedural history, the applicant set out certain general legal principles and quoted passages from authorities and statutes, and asserted that the Board acted in a procedurally unfair manner in dealing with his application without properly assessing his credibility.  He also largely reiterated paragraphs 3 to 6 of his Notice of Motion.

6.Having considered the materials available, we are satisfied that there is no reasonable prospect of success in the intended appeal.  Nor is there any question involved which, by reason of its great general or public importance, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision, as required by section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484).  Neither do we see any reason why the applicant should, for some other reason, be allowed to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

7.The Notice of Motion is therefore dismissed.

The Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person