Re Niwunhelle Herath Mudiyanselage Priyani

CACV 9/2024, [2024] HKCA 786

On Appeal From [2024] HKCFI 82

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2024

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 1155 OF 2019)

___________________________________________

___________________________________________

________________

JUDGMENT

________________

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

I.  Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal

1.On 26 April 2024, this Court (Cheung JA and Lisa Wong J) handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge KW Lung given on 4 January 2024 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.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 7 May 2024, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. The applicant stated in her notice of motion the following :

‘ I would like to infomr the Honourable Court that there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker relied on COL information and my previous facts which were in favor while rejecting my claim. Acual life occur different situation then what is mentioned in COL Information. The Officer and cours prefers to ignore the overwheming of the evidence of this violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The Decision is betray a bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly not reasonable.’ (Actual quotation with errors)

4.The applicant’s written submission consists of general statement of law, quotation from cases, bald statement of procedural unfairness and reference to statute.

II.  Our view

5.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.

6.The matters stated by the applicant in her notice of motion and written submission do not constitute ground for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. 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 Ordinance. Nor is there any such question apparent to us from the matters raised by the applicant.

7.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

8.For these reasons, the notice of motion dated 7 May 2024 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person