Re Fatmawati

CACV 2/2022

[2023] HKCA 361

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 2 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 2696 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.This is the applicant’s Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal handed down on 27 May 2022 ([2022] HKCA 745). The Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 24 December 2021 ([2021] HKCFI 3862) refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning her non-refoulement claim.

2.Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper without an oral hearing. The applicant lodged written submissions on 14 June 2022. Having considered the written submissions and the papers, we think it is appropriate to determine this application on paper and proceed to do so.

3.The applicant is a national of Indonesia. She lodged a torture claim by letters dated 31 March and 8 April 2011 which was subsequently withdrawn on 20 September 2012. On her application, the Director of Immigration allowed her to re-open her torture claim on 22 January 2018. Meanwhile, on 21 January 2014, she raised a non-refoulement claim. Her claims were made on the basis that she will be harmed or killed by (1) Nipo’s family as she had poisoned Nipo’s son causing his death, and (2) her own family members in Indonesia because they disapproved her marriage to a Christian in Hong Kong.

Grounds of appeal

4.In the Notice of Motion filed on 31 May 2022, the applicant only stated that she wants to challenge the decision, without putting forward any specific grounds.

5.In the written submissions, she reiterated the procedural history of her case and the problems that she will face upon her return to Indonesia.

Analysis and disposition

6.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484) provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, 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.

7.In the present application, the applicant failed to point out any error in the Court of Appeal’s decision, nor did she identify any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b). There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

8.For the above reasons, we refuse to exercise our discretion to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 31 May 2022.

The Applicant (Appellant), acting in person