Re Alpajando Joan Halasan

CACV 155/2022

[2023] HKCA 475

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 155 OF 2022

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 373 OF 2019)

____________________

____________________

____________________

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 24 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 Bruno Chan given on 7 April 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 7 November 2022, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant stated in her notice of motion :

‘ I would like to reject and review the court’s decision. They (discard) disregard my dangerous situation.’

4.The applicant stated in her written submissions that the Board was insensitive to her case.  She referred to country of origin information and said ‘How could I trust that I would have be safe when I return to the country.’  She stated that if she returned she would need to be constantly running away.

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 7 November 2022 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person