Re Virender Kumar

CAMP 284/2022

[2023] HKCA 173

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 284 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2966 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

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”). His application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s decision was dismissed by the Court of First Instance. His application for extension of time to appeal against that decision was dismissed by this Court in our judgment dated 8 September 2022.

2.By Notice of Motion filed on 9 January 2023, the applicant seeks leave to appeal against our judgment to the CFA.  In that document the applicant simply stated that all the previous decisions were not good for him and he wanted to go to the Court of Final Appeal.

3.In the written submissions lodged on 26 January 2023, the applicant repeated there was danger for him in his own country, India, so that he could not return.  He stated he wanted to go to the Court of Final Appeal for himself and all asylum seekers who were facing the same problem.

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 he has failed to show any prospects of success in the intended appeal.  Further, the application was made long after the expiry of the 28-day time limit prescribed by section 24 of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

6.Accordingly, the Notice of Motion is dismissed.

The Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person