Re Abuzar

CACV 438/2023, [2024] HKCA 785

On Appeal From [2023] HKCFI 3294

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 438 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 255 OF 2021)

____________

____________

________________

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 Bruno Chan given on 18 December 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.The applicant now applies, by a notice of motion filed on 30 April 2024, for leave to appeal against our judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. The applicant stated in his notice of motion the following :

‘ Director of Immigration and Torture Claims Appeal Board dismissed my non-refoulement claim. Specialy Appeal Board did many error when he took decission for me. I did not get justice from the High Court and from the Court of Appeal. I want to go to the Court of Final Appeal.’

4.The applicant stated in his written submissions in summary the following points :

1)  If the applicant returns to his home country he will be killed by his then girlfriend’s family;

2)  The Immigration Department, the Torture Claims Appeal Board, the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal all reject his claim; and

3)  The applicant represents the interest of all asylum seekers.

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 his notice of motion and written submissions are broad and vague assertions that do not pertain to nor explain and elaborate on the particular circumstances of the applicant. In any event, the matters stated do not constitute grounds 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 30 April 2024 is dismissed.

Applicant, unrepresented, acting in person