Re Mukhtar Amir

CACV 100/2023, [2024] HKCA 684

On Appeal From[2023] HKCFI 668

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 100 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 716 OF 2019)

____________________

____________________

____________________

JUDGMENT

____________________

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

I.  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.On 21 July 2023, this Court (Cheung JA and Anthony Chan J) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung given on 21 March 2023 in which he refused to grant leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review.

2.The facts and issues of the appeal as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it are set out in our judgment.  We will not repeat them here.

3.Pursuant to the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals dated 27 July 2023, the applicant was to lodge and serve on or before 10 August 2023 written submissions failing which he will be deemed to have abandoned his right to rely on written submissions and the matter will be considered by this Court based on the available materials.  The applicant has not lodged or served written submission by the stipulated deadline.

4.Having considered the applicant’s documents, we see no reason to depart from the usual practice of determining applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on paper without an oral hearing.  We have, therefore, proceeded to determine the applicant’s application on the basis of the documents in the case.

5.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 27 July 2023, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal.  The applicant stated in his notice of motion the following :

‘ I would like to inform to Court of Final Appeal. I am strongly opposed the decision made by the authorities. Because they were totally relied on some web news which officially not recognized. So I am disagree with the decision. It is totally unfair to me and I do not think my case determined fairlly.’

II.  Our view

6.Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) (‘Ordinance’) leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted if the question to be determined involves great general or public importance or otherwise ought to be determined by the Court of Final Appeal.

7.The applicant has failed to identify any question of general or public importance for the Court of Final Appeal to determine in accordance with section 22(1)(b) of the Ordinance. Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters he has raised in his documents. 

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

III.  Disposition

9.For these reasons, the notice of motion dated 27 July 2023 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person