Faiq Muhammad v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
|
CACV 472/2025, [2026] HKCA 1701 On Appeal From [2025] HKCFI 2034 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF APPEAL CIVIL APPEAL NO. 472 OF 2025 (ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 201 OF 2020) ________________________ BETWEEN
_____________________
_____________________ J U D G M E N T _____________________ The Court: 1.By a judgment dated 11 February 2026, this Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge (Non-refoulement Claims) Teresa Wu dated 3 July 2025, refusing him leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non-refoulement claims. 2.By a notice of motion dated 23 February 2026, the applicant applied to us for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under section 22(1) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484)[1] on the ground that (sic):
3.The notice of motion does not meet the statutory threshold for leave to be granted because it fails to (a) state any error in our judgment; (b) raise any viable ground of appeal that is reasonably arguable; or (c) identify any question of great general or public importance involved in the intended appeal; and there is no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “or otherwise” limb. 4.In consequence, we refuse to grant leave and dismiss the notice of motion.
The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person [1] Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance 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 in any civil cause or matter 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. |
Summaries and metadata are generated from the judgment. Report an error
Cases cited in this judgment