Latifa Baraja v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CAMP 505 /2022, [2023] HKCA 1169

On appeal from [2022] HKCFI 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 505 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1116 OF 2019)

________________________

________________________

________________

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 19 April 2023 ([2023] HKCA 523). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dated 19 July 2022 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 her written submissions one day late on 3 May 2023. Having considered her 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 entered Hong Kong on 14 January 2015 as a foreign domestic helper and her employment contract was terminated prematurely on 22 February 2015. She subsequently overstayed and was arrested by the police on 12 September 2015. On 23 September 2015, she lodged a non-refoulement claim on the basis that, if refouled, she would be harmed or killed by her husband.

4.She 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 21 October 2022[1].

5.On 1 December 2022, the applicant filed a renewed application for extension of time to appeal with the Court of Appeal. The application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 19 April 2023 as the applicant failed to show any prospect of success in her intended appeal.

Grounds of appeal

6.In the Notice of Motion filed on 19 April 2023, the applicant only stated that she did not get justice so she wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal to get justice.

7.In her written submissions, she reiterated the procedural history of her claim and the problems she faced in her home country. She further submitted that she wants to go to the Court of Final Appeal to speak for the interests of all asylum seekers.

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.In the present application, the applicant has not identified any mistakes in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, nor has she raised 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 grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 19 April 2023.

The Applicant, acting in person