Nguya Adam Iddi v. Torture Claims Appeal Board

CACV 484/2021

[2022] HKCA 901

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 484 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1943 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

Before:  Hon Kwan Ag CJHC and Lisa Wong J in Court

Date of Written Submission:  8 February 2022

Date of Judgment:  24 June 2022

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan Ag CJHC (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.This is the applicant’s Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Kwan VP and Lisa Wong J) handed down on 21 January 2022 ([2022] HKCA 136). The Court of Appeal rejected his appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 22 October 2021 ([2021] HKCFI 3172) refusing to grant leave to seek judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim.

2.Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 24 January 2022 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged his written submissions on 8 February 2022. Having considered his written submissions and the papers, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and proceed to do so.

3.The applicant is a national of Tanzania. He arrived in Hong Kong on 28 June 2016 as a visitor and subsequently overstayed. He surrendered to the Immigration Department on 27 September 2016 and raised a non-refoulement claim on 20 March 2017. His claim was made on the basis that he will be harmed or killed by supporters of the ruling political party Chama Cha Mapinduzi as he supported the opposition party Chadema Party.

4.He filed a Form 86 on 14 September 2018 to seek leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). His application was dismissed by DHCJ Bruno Chan on 22 October 2021.

5.The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal on 27 October 2021. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 21 January 2022. The applicant filed a Notice of Motion on 24 January 2022 for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

Grounds of appeal

6.In the Notice of Motion, the applicant only stated that he wanted to challenge the decision without giving any specific grounds of appeal.

7.He reiterated the problems he faced in his home country and some procedural history of his case in his written submissions. He also submitted that he wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal because not only his claim was rejected but 99% of the claims of non-refoulement of other applicants were rejected.

Analysis and disposition

8.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484) provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, 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.

9.In the present application, the applicant did not have any viable arguments against the decision of the Court of Appeal. The submissions concerning the alleged problems in his home country have been considered in his appeal to Court of Appeal and the applicant failed to demonstrate that the Court of Appeal was wrong in dismissing his appeal.

10.Although the applicant referred to the high rejection rate of applications of this nature, he failed to identify any mistakes or unfairness in the adjudication of the non-refoulement claims with any credible evidence.

11.Besides, the applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b). There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

12.For the above reasons, we refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 24 January 2022.

The Applicant (Appellant), acting in person