Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Re Begum Mst Sinthia And Another

Judgment Cited authorities 1 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date11 June 2021
Neutral Citation[2021] HKCA 839
Year2021
Judgement NumberCAMP92/2020
Subject MatterMiscellaneous Proceedings
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
CAMP92A/2020 RE BEGUM MST SINTHIA AND ANOTHER

CAMP 92/2020

[2021] HKCA 839

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 92 OF 2020

(ON AN INTENDED APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 651 OF 2018)

________________________

RE: BEGUM MST SINTHIA 1st Applicant
ZAHEER JANNATUL FERDAUS 2nd Applicant

________________________

Before: Hon Cheung and Au JJA in Court

Date of Written Submissions: 25 March 2021

Date of Judgment: 11 June 2021

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________


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

1. On 12 March 2021, the 1st applicant on behalf of the 2nd applicant and herself filed a Notice of Motion to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against this Court’s judgment of 1 March 2021 (“the Judgment”) [2021] HKCA 207. In the Judgment, we refused to grant extension of time to the applicants to appeal the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan on 28 June 2019, refusing to grant them leave to apply for judicial review.

2. The facts and issues in the appeal, as well as the Court’s reasons for dismissing it, are set out in the Judgment. We will not repeat them here. After reviewing the Notice of Motion, we see no reason to deviate from the usual practice to consider this application on paper pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1.

3. Under section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484), leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal will only be granted 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.

4. In the Notice of Motion, the applicants raised the following grounds of appeal:

“Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to infomr the Honourable Court that there is some error in law in my decision. Decision maker just 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 overwhelming of the evidence of this violence towards minorities searching for unrealistic silver lining. The Decision is betrary a bias and formula approach unlikely fairly access the danger of my life and clearly not...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT