Re Hangili Gedara Imalka Priyadarshanie

CAMP 358/2022

[2023] HKCA 86

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 358 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 935 OF 2019)

____________________

____________________

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

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

1.This is an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”). 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 (“Board”). Her application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s decision was dismissed by the Court of First Instance. Her application for extension of time to appeal against that decision was dismissed by this Court in our judgment dated 16 December 2022.[1]

2.By Notice of Motion filed on 28 December 2022, the applicant seeks leave to appeal against our judgment to the CFA.  In that document the applicant states that her life will be in danger if she goes back to Sri Lanka because her ex-husband will kill her.

3.In her written submissions lodged on 9 January 2023, the applicant states that her ex-husband had been involved in murderous crimes in Sri Lanka, had hurt her while he was in Hong Kong, and is now causing trouble in Sri Lanka to her sister.  If she goes back to Sri Lanka, he will harm her and possibly kill her.  The applicant asks the court for a solution that will save her life.  She says if she returns to Sri Lanka, her daughter will face big trouble too.

4.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.

5.We take the view that this application ought to be dismissed because the applicant has not shown that the intended appeal 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), and also because she has failed to show any prospects of success in the intended appeal.

6.Accordingly, the Notice of Motion is dismissed.

The Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person