Re Jevanpreet Singh

CACV 406/2023, [2026] HKCA 511

On appeal from [2023] HKCFI 2920

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 406 OF 2023

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 1158 OF 2019)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

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

1.On 30 April 2024, this court (Barma JA and Ng J)  handed down a judgment dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge KW Lung given on 1 December 2023 refusing leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review. The applicant had sought to review the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”)  dismissing his appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration rejecting his non-refoulement claim, as well as against the decision of the Director itself.

2.The facts and issues in the applicant’s appeal, as well as the court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in our judgment.[1]  We will not repeat them here.  

3.The applicant subsequently applied, by a Notice of Motion filed on 22 May 2024, for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  In the Notice of Motion, the applicant contended that:

“there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just relied on COL Information and my previous facts which were in favour while rejecting my claim.”

4.In breach of the directions of the Registrar of Civil Appeals, the applicant failed to lodge any written submissions in support of his Notice of Motion.  He is thus deemed to have abandoned his right to rely on written submissions, and his application will be determined on the documents already filed with this court.  

5.Section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484 (“the HKCFAO”)  provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of this court or the Court of Final Appeal if 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.

6.The matters raised in the applicant’s Notice of Motion are all bare allegations and do not constitute grounds for granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.  Importantly, he has failed to identify any question of great general or public importance, or any other reason why his case ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination on the basis of the “or otherwise” limb as required by section 22(1)(b)  of the HKCFAO.

7.The Notice of Motion fails to identify any supposed error in our judgment and the matters stated therein raise no ground that is reasonably arguable before the Court of Final Appeal.

8.For these reasons, the Notice of Motion dated 22 May 2024 is dismissed.

The applicant acting in person