Re Aure Jonilyn Celso

CACV 61/2022

[2023] HKCA 474

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 61 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 2117 OF 2018)

____________________

____________________

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

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

I.  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.On 11 October 2022, this Court (Cheung and Yuen JJA) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung given on 28 January 2022 in 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 24 October 2022, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant attached to her notice of motion a three‑page document.  In summary, the applicant stated the following factual matters, including : she witnessed a rape perpetrated by her stepfather who is a violent man; her son born in Hong Kong is suffering from illness; corruption and bribery are prevalent in the Philippines; the police do not enforce law, and nothing was done by the police even after she reported her stepfather to the police; she was subject to abuse by her stepfather; and her family would be in danger if she returned.

4.The applicant stated in her written submission that, in summary, she witnessed a rape perpetrated by her stepfather who was released because he was influential.  She stated that she was not offered help with her non-refoulement claim; listing statistics of sex abuse worldwide; corruption and bribery were prevalent; if her stepfather kills, he can even get away with that.  She stated that her stepfather abused her; internal relocation was not possible; police did not help her and nothing was done by the police when the applicant reported her stepfather.

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 her notice of motion and written submissions 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 she has raised in her notice of motion and written submissions. 

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, the notice of motion dated 24 October 2022 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person