Re Gurinder Singh

CAMP 264/2021

[2023] HKCA 244

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 264 OF 2021

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 2900 OF 2018)

_________________________

_________________________

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.This court handed down judgment on 12 July 2022 ([2022] HKCA 995) dismissing the applicant’s application to extend time to appeal against an order of DHCJ P. Li (“the Judge”) given on 10 November 2020 in which he refused the applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non‑refoulement claim.

2.The facts and issues in the application before this court, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment and will not be repeated here.

3.On 30 August 2022, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal this court’s judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.

4.The Notice of Motion only stated the following:

“Director of Immigration and Torture Claims Appeal Board dismissed my non refoulement claim. I was not satisfied so I came to the High Court for leave to appeal for judicial review. The High Court and the Court of Appeal dismissed my apply. I want to go to the Court of Final Appeal.”

5.The applicant has filed a supporting affirmation saying that he was out of time.  In fact, he was not out of time as he had 28 days to lodge his appeal and the deadline fell within the Summer Vacation (s.31(1) High Court Ordinance Cap. 4).

6.In compliance with the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals given on 30 August 2022, the applicant lodged his written submissions on 13 September 2022.  This Notice of Motion is determined on paper without an oral hearing, which we consider appropriate. 

7.In his written submissions, he merely repeated his statement in the Notice of Motion.

8.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (“HKCFAO”) (Cap. 484) provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted if 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.

9.Having regard to the judgment of this court, the applicant’s intended appeal has no merit at all. No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.     

10.Nor do we see any basis for granting leave under the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

11.By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 30 August 2022 is dismissed.

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person