Manuel Amelyn Torres v. Immigration Department

CAMP 235/2021

[2022] HKCA 933

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 235 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 266 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

Before:  Hon Kwan Ag CJHC and Au JA in Court

Date of Judgment:  29 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 Au JA) handed down on 31 January 2022 ([2022] HKCA 112). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time for the applicant to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 6 July 2020 ([2020] HKCFI 1326) dismissing the application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning her non-refoulement claim.

2.Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 14 February 2022 that the applicant should lodge written submissions in support of her Notice of Motion on or before 28 February 2022 and that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing upon compliance with the direction or the expiry of the time for the compliance of the direction. The applicant did not lodge any written submission as directed. As the time for compliance with the said directions has expired, having considered 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 the Philippines. She came to Hong Kong on 7 April 2014 to work as a foreign domestic helper. Her employment contract was prematurely terminated in May 2014 and she subsequently overstayed. She surrendered to the Immigration Department on 15 May 2015 and lodged a non-refoulement claim on 4 February 2016. Her claim was made on the basis that she will be harmed or killed by her former boyfriend because of their domestic disputes if she returns to the Philippines.

4.She took out a summons in the court below to seek an extension of time to appeal against the decision of the judge. It was refused by the judge on 17 June 2021[1].

5.The applicant renewed her application to the Court of Appeal for extension of time to appeal on 30 June 2021. The application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 31 January 2022 as the applicant failed to show any prospect of success in her intended appeal.

Grounds of appeal

6.In the Notice of Motion filed on 14 February 2022, the applicant stated that justice is not in her favour without giving any specific grounds of appeal.

Analysis and disposition

7.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance 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.

8.In the present application, the applicant did not put forward any viable grounds of appeal. In particular, she has not demonstrated that the Court of Appeal was wrong in its decision. Furthermore, she 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).

9.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 14 February 2022.

The Applicant, acting in person