Zaman Adil v. Torture Claims Appeal Board

CAMP 232/2022, [2023] HKCA 884

On appeal from [2020] HKCFI 2225

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 232 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 857 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 1 February 2023 ([2023] HKCA 111). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 9 September 2020 dismissing the application for leave to seek judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board concerning the applicant’s 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 his written submissions on 8 March 2023. Having considered his 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 Pakistan. He entered Hong Kong illegally on 14 August 2015 and was subsequently arrested by the police. After he was released on bail, he surrendered to the Immigration Department and lodged a non-refoulement claim on 10 May 2016 on the basis that he would be harmed or killed by the Abbas family due to political disputes if he is returned to Pakistan.

4.He took out a summons in the court below to seek an extension of time to appeal against the decision of the judge. It was refused by the judge on 12 May 2022[1].

5.On 6 July 2022, the applicant filed a renewed application for leave to appeal out of time. The application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 1 February 2023 as the applicant failed to show any prospect of success in his intended appeal.

Grounds of appeal

6.The applicant stated the following as his grounds in the Notice of Motion filed on 24 February 2023:

“I would like to infomr [sic] the Honourable Court that there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just relied on COL [sic] Information and my previous facts which were in favor while rejecting my claim. Acual [sic] life occur different situation then what is mentioned in COL [sic] Information. The Officer and cours [sic] prefers to ignore the overwheming [sic] of the evidence of this violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The Decision is betrary [sic] a bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly not reasonable.”

7.His written submissions may be summarised as follows:

(1)  high standards of fairness are required in the determination of a torture claim on the part of the decision maker;

(2)  the Board acted in a procedurally unfair manner without properly assessing his credibility.

Analysis and disposition

8.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.

9.The applicant’s grounds and submissions are just bare assertions without particulars or evidence in support. He has not identified 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).

10.For the above reasons, we refuse to give leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 24 February 2023.

The Applicant, acting in person