Re Prabhjot Singh

CACV 424/2021

[2022] HKCA 1111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 424 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 320 OF 2021)

____________

____________

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

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

1.The applicant’s claim for non-refoulement protection in Hong Kong was rejected by the Director of Immigration and by the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office. His application for leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed by the Court of First Instance.[1] He filed a notice of appeal in this court on 1 September 2021, but failed to comply with the direction of the Registrar of Civil Appeals for lodging an appeal bundle and with a subsequent order made by G Lam JA that unless appeal bundles were lodged by 4:30 pm on 20 October 2021, the appeal would stand dismissed without further order. As a result of the applicant’s failure to comply with the unless order, the appeal was dismissed.

2.By Notice of Motion filed on 17 June 2022, the applicant seeks leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”), stating that he did not want to go back to his home country because his enemies would kill him. In an attachment to his accompanying affirmation, the applicant stated that he did receive the letter from the High Court asking him to submit appeal bundles by 20 October 2021, but he was sick and could not reach the court on time. After one week, he was arrested by the police in connection with a criminal case.

3.Despite having acknowledged the directions for written submissions for his application to be lodged with the court by 4 July 2022, the applicant has not to date lodged any submissions. There is no reason for us to depart from the usual practice of determining an application of this kind on the basis of the available materials without an oral hearing, as set out in paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1.

4.Plainly the application must be dismissed because the applicant has not shown that there is an intended appeal that raises any question which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the CFA for decision (which is the condition for giving leave to appeal under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484).

5.In any event, the applicant was directed on 1 September 2021 to lodge an appeal bundle (consisting of only a few essential documents) by 15 September 2021. The unless order was made on 6 October 2021. The applicant was only arrested on 8-9 November 2021. We do not consider that there was any reasonable excuse for the applicant’s failure to comply.

6.More recently, by letter to the court dated 15 July 2022, the applicant asked for his case to be withdrawn because he wants to go back to his home country.

7.Accordingly, the Notice of Motion is dismissed.

The Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person