Re Resurreccion Maryjane Yacapin

CAMP 224/2022, [2024] HKCA 281

On Appeal From [2022] HKCFI 542

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 224 OF 2022

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 2085 OF 2018)

____________________

____________________

____________________

Judgment

____________________

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

1)  Leave to appeal

1.This is an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against our Decision of 16 March 2023.

2.The material facts relevant to the present application have been set out in our Decision and we do not intend to repeat them here.

2)  Grounds advanced

3.From what can be gathered from the notice of motion, the applicant’s complaints are that (1) the Country-of-Origin information (‘COI’) and previous facts relied upon by the Board did not reflect the actual-life situation and there is thus an error in the Board’s decision; and (2) the Board was biased and did not fairly assess the danger to the applicant’s life by adopting a formula approach.

4.The applicant had also lodged written submissions on 12 April 2023 in accordance with the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals (‘Directions’).  Its contents are in all material respects the same as the written submissions previously lodged by her on 13 July 2022 in respect of her renewed application to the Court of Appeal for an extension of time to appeal.  They are summarized in paragraph 17 of our Decision and have already been considered by this Court.

3)  Our view

5.Notwithstanding the applicant’s request in her written submissions for an oral hearing, we see no reason for us to depart from the usual practice of determining the present application on the basis of the available materials without an oral hearing.

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

7.The complaints set out in the notice of motion and written submissions are all bare allegations without any particulars and evidence in support.  They do not identify any mistakes in our Decision and do not constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  Importantly, the applicant has failed to identify any question of great 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 raised in such documents.

8.We do not see any basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b).

9.Accordingly, the notice of motion is dismissed.

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person