Re Satisha Bhadregowda

CACV 21/2022

[2023] HKCA 338

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 174 OF 2019)

____________________

____________________

____________________

DECISION

____________________

Hon Cheung JA (giving the Decision of the Court) :

I.  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.On 28 June 2022, this Court handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan given on 31 December 2021 by which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

2.The facts and issues of the appeal as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it are set out in our judgment. We will not repeat them here.

3.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 8 July 2022, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant stated in his notice of motion in summary the following points :

‘ 1-The Learned Judge were wrong…for not having applied the principle of procedural unfairness..…

2-The Learned Judge were wrong… for not having applied the principle of irrationality…

3-…courts prefers (sic) to ignore the overwhelming of the evidence of the violence towards minorities…

4-The Judge did not apply the law properly…

5-…I would be killed or harmed if I return back to my country…’

4.The applicant did not lodge written submissions by the stipulated deadline pursuant to the directions of this Court dated 24 August 2022.

II.  Our view

5.Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘HKCFAO’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

6.The matters stated by the applicant in his notice of motion do not constitute grounds for granting leave to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant has failed to identify any question of general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.  Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters he has raised in his notice of motion. 

7.We also do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b) of the HKCFAO.

III.  Disposition

8.For these reasons, we will dismiss the notice of motion filed on 8 July 2022.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person