Re Arshad Muhammad Alias Faisal Alias Muhammad Faisal

CACV 14/2022

[2022] HKCA 1022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 14 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 660 OF 2021)

________________________

________________________

Before:  Hon Chow JA and Wong J in Court

Date of Notice of Motion:  10 June 2022

Date of Submission:  24 June 2022

Date of Judgment:  18 July 2022

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Wong J (giving the judgment of the court):

1.This Court (Chow JA and Wong J)  gave Judgment on 17 May 2022 dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan (“the Judge”)  given on 30 December 2021 refusing his application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim.  The facts and issues in the appeal before the Court of Appeal, as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our Judgment and will not be detailed here.

2.The applicant subsequently applied, by a Notice of Motion dated 10 June 2022, for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  The Registrar of Civil Appeals directed the applicant to lodge written submissions by 24 June 2022.

3.The Applicant filed submission on 24 June 2022.

4.The Registrar had further directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  We agree it is appropriate to determine this application on paper.

5.The applicant is not legally represented.  In his Notice of Motion, the applicant stated that the decision of the Judge is erroneous and reiterated that his life would still be in danger if he returns to Pakistan.

6.In his submission, the Applicant stressed the significance of the decision on him and alleged failure to apply the high standards of fairness in the decision and the decision making process.

7.Section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance[1] provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal shall be granted at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal if the question in the appeal involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.

8.No question of great general or public importance has been identified in the Notice of Motion and submission.  Nor do we see any basis for granting leave on the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

9.As there is no basis for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion dated 10 June 2022 is dismissed.

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person