Kandana Arachchige Dayal Dilruk Kumara v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CACV 274/2022

[2022] HKCA 1826

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 274 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1119 OF 2019)

________________________

________________________

Before:  Hon Chow JA and K Yeung J in Court

Date of Written Submissions:  5 December 2022

Date of Judgment:  15 December 2022

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

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

1.On 14 November 2022, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”) dismissing the Applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 7 July 2022 refusing to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office dated 21 March 2019, whereby the Board dismissed the Applicant’s appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 14 July 2017.

2.The Applicant now applies by Notice of Motion dated 22 November 2022 for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. In the Notice of Motion and his written submissions dated 5 December 2022, the Applicant repeats that his life would be in danger in Sri Lanka. He has also attached some documents to his written submissions which purport to provide some information concerning the conditions in Sri Lanka. The Applicant has, however, failed to point to any alleged error in the CA Judgment.

3.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.

4.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.

5.Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion is dismissed.

The Applicant, acting in person