Mohammad Sharif v. Torture Claims Appeal Board

CACV 287/2021

[2022] HKCA 43

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 287 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1044 OF 2018)

________________________

BETWEEN

________________________

Before:  Hon Chow JA and ST Poon J in Court

Date of Judgment:  18 January 2022

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

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

1.On 1 November 2021, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”)  dismissing the Applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 20 May 2021 refusing to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office/Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”)  dated 29 May 2018.

2.The Applicant now applies by Notice of Motion dated 16 December 2021 for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the following is stated:

“Director Immigration and Torture Claims Appeal Board rejected my claim. I applied to the High Court. The High Court dismissed my leave. The Court of Appeal too dismissed my appeal. I want to go to the Court of Final Appeal.”

3.The Applicant has not filed any written submissions in support of the Notice of Motion notwithstanding the direction of the Registrar of Civil Appeals dated 30 December 2021.

4.Under s 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of, inter alia, the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal 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.

5.No question of great general or public importance involved in the proposed appeal is identified in the Notice of Motion.  We are unable to see any such question being involved in the proposed appeal.  There is also no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “otherwise” limb in s 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

6.Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion is dismissed.

The Applicant, unrepresented, appeared in person