Re Re Winarti Saidjan

CACV 9/2022

[2023] HKCA 363

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 9 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 2744 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 746). The Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 23 December 2021 ([2021] HKCFI 3816) refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review against the decisions 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 came to Hong Kong as a domestic helper in 1998. She did not leave Hong Kong after her employment was terminated pre-maturely on 23 March 2002 and subsequently overstayed. She was arrested by the police on 11 September 2009. Her non-refoulement claim was received by the Immigration Department on 19 June 2013. Her claim was made on the basis that she will be harmed or killed by her ex-husband Tumirin if she returns to Indonesia because she had an affair with a fellow villager and had a child with the villager.

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 problems she faced in Indonesia previously and the problems she will face upon her return.

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 this application, the applicant did not 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