Nguyen Ngoc Tuan v. Director of Immigration

CACV 66/2023, [2023] HKCA 931

On Appeal From [2023] HKCFI 464

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 66 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1175 OF 2022)

________________________

____________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Chow JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.On 13 June 2023, this Court gave its judgment (“the CA Judgment”) dismissing the Applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 17 February 2023 refusing to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 7 October 2022 refusing to allow him to make a subsequent claim for non-refoulement protection after his previous claim had been rejected by both the Director and the Torture Claims Appeal Board.

2.By Notice of Motion dated 27 June 2023, the Applicant applies for leave to appeal the CA Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. In the Notice of Motion, the Applicant reiterates that he will be tortured, beaten or even killed by his creditor and other gangsters because he is unable to repay his outstanding debts. He disagrees with the Director’s view that he could relocate to another part of Vietnam away from his home, and alleges that the Immigration Department did not consider his human rights under, inter alia, the Basic Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Applicant has failed, however, to identify any error in the CA Judgment, or raise any proper or valid ground of appeal against the CA Judgment.

3.The Applicant has failed to lodge written submissions in support of his application contrary to the directions given by the Registrar of Civil Appeals on 27 June 2023.

4.Under s 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal in any civil cause or matter 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.

5.No question of great general or public importance involved in the proposed appeal is identified in the Notice of Motion. We are unable to see any such question being involved in the proposed appeal. We are satisfied that the intended appeal has no merits and no reasonable prospect of success. There is also no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “or otherwise” limb in s 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

6.Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is refused and the Notice of Motion is dismissed.

The Applicant, acting in person