Awaiz Khan v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CAMP 118/2023, [2023] HKCA 1349

On appeal from [2022] HKCFI 1356

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 118 OF 2023

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 526 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 11 July 2023 ([2023] HKCA 827). The Court of Appeal refused to grant extension of time to appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge To dated 12 May 2022 dismissing the application for extension of time to apply for leave to seek judicial review against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the 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 31 July 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 Pakistani national. He entered Hong Kong illegally on 13 July 2015 and was arrested the following day. He lodged a non-refoulement claim on 23 July 2015 claiming that he would be killed by his Afghan business partners due to a business debt.

4.In the notice of motion filed on 20 July 2023, the applicant stated that the judges were procedurally unfair in the decision. He claimed that he wrote a letter to the Immigration Department to withdraw his case because his problem was solved in Pakistan but his opponent refused to receive the money and the situation in Pakistan has become worse now.

5.His written submissions are the same as the submissions in his previous application before the Court of Appeal.

Analysis and disposition

6.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance 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.

7.The applicant did not provide any particulars or elaboration as to why the court’s decision was procedurally unfair. He put forward the same written submissions which have been considered and rejected by the Court of Appeal in the last occasion. He has not identified any mistakes in the judgment of the Court of Appeal nor 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).

8.We therefore refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 20 July 2023.

The Applicant, acting in person