Re Papia

CAMP 52/2022

[2023] HKCA 257

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 52 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL 1634 OF 2019)

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

___________________

J U D G M E N T

___________________

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

1.On 23 June 2022, this court (Chu JA (as she then was) and Barma JA) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s application for extension of time to appeal against the decision of DHCJ P Li dated 20 May 2021 refusing to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review. The applicant had sought to review the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) dismissing her appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration rejecting her non‑refoulement claim.

2.The facts and issues in the applicant’s application, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment.[1]  We will not repeat them here.

3.The applicant subsequently applied, by a Notice of Motion filed on 11 July 2022, for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the applicant stated she was dissatisfied with the Board’s decision and wished to “go to the Court of Final Appeal”.

4.In her written submissions lodged on 25 July 2022, the applicant claimed that she “did not get justice from [the] very beginning to end” and that she wished to “go to the Court of Final Appeal”.

5.On 26 October 2022, the applicant purported to seek a “dismissal of the appeal filed on the 11 day of July, 2022” by filing a Request for Dismissal of Appeal (“Request”).  No explanation, whether in the form of an affirmation or written submissions, was given for this request.  As we explain below, the application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal has no merits and falls to be dismissed.  It is therefore not necessary to deal with the Request.

6.Having considered the applicant’s Notice of Motion and written submissions, we see no reason to depart from the usual practice of determining an application of this kind on the papers.  We have, therefore, determined the applicant’s application on the basis of the documents filed.

7.The matters stated by the applicant do not constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine, as required by section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484.  Nor is any such question apparent to us from the matters she has raised.

8.Neither the Notice of Motion nor the written submissions identify any supposed error in our judgment and they raise no ground that is reasonably arguable before the Court of Final Appeal.

9.We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the “otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

10.For these reasons, the Notice of Motion dated 11 July 2022 is dismissed.

The applicant acting in person