Rizwan Khan v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CAMP 98/2022

[2022] HKCA 1361

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 98 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2199 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

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

1.On 2 August 2022, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”) dismissing the Applicant’s application for an extension of time to appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge P Li dated 18 November 2021 refusing to grant him leave to apply for judicial review.

2.The Applicant now applies by Notice of Motion dated 8 August 2022 for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. In the Notice of Motion, the following is stated:

“… I am late for apply due to lack of knowledge and insufficient sources. Please accept my filling application so that I can process my case further. I hope I will get your favour.”

3.In the written submissions of the Applicant dated 15 August 2022, he repeated his claim that he would be in danger and his life would not not safe in his home country. He stated that he was not satisfied with all the decisions so far. He alleged that the police and other “law making authorities” in his country were subject to political influence. He also said it would be very difficult to get justice in that corrupt environment. He has failed, however, to point to any alleged error in the CA Judgment.

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 the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal in any civil cause or matter 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.

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. We are satisfied that the intended appeal has no merits and no reasonable prospect of success. There is also no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “or 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, acting in person