Harpreet Kaur v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CACV 587/2021

[2022] HKCA 1562

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 587 OF 2021

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2034 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

Before:  Hon Kwan VP and Lisa Wong J in Court

Date of Written Submission:  10 June 2022

Date of Judgment:  28 October 2022

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan VP (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 27 May 2022 ([2022] HKCA 731). The Court of Appeal rejected her appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 15 December 2021 ([2021] HKCFI 3693) refusing to grant leave for the applicant to apply for leave to seek 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 30 May 2022 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged her written submissions on 10 June 2022. Having considered her 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 India. She attempted to enter Hong Kong on 13 April 2015 and was refused permission to land. She lodged a non-refoulement claim on the same day. Her claim was made on the basis that she will be harmed or killed by her father and one Mr Singh who was a member of the Akali Party and a district head of Batala area because she refused to marry Mr Singh.

Grounds of appeal

4.The applicant filed a Notice of Motion on 30 May 2022 for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and stated the following as her grounds of appeal:

“I would like to infomr [sic] the Honourable Court that there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just relied on COL [sic] information and my previous facts which were in favor while rejecting my claim. Acual [sic] life occur different situation then what is mentioned in COL [sic] Information. The Officer and cours [sic] prefers to ignore the overwheming [sic] of the evidence of this violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The Decision is betrary [sic] a bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly not reasonable.”

5.Her written submissions may be summarised as follows:

(1)  High standards of fairness are required in the determination of a torture claim on the part of the decision maker.

(2)  The Board acted in a procedurally unfair manner without properly assessing her credibility.

Analysis and disposition

6.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.

7.The applicant’s grounds in the present application are just bare assertions. The Court of Appeal has sufficiently dealt with her grounds and submissions in the appeal. She failed to identify properly any error of the court and/or what particular evidence was ignored by the court. Furthermore, she has not mentioned 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).

8.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 30 May 2022.

The Applicant, acting in person