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

Re Rahman Zaiwr Ur

Judgment Cited authorities 7 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date10 February 2021
Neutral Citation[2021] HKCA 151
Year2021
Judgement NumberCACV164/2020
Subject MatterCivil Appeal
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
CACV164A/2020 RE RAHMAN ZAIWR UR

CACV 164/2020

[2021] HKCA 151

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 164 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 289 OF 2018)

________________________

RE: RAHMAN ZAIWR UR Applicant

________________________

Before: Hon Cheung JA, Au JA and ST Poon J in Court
Date of Written Submissions: 1 December 2020
Date of Judgment: 10 February 2021

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

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

1. On 20 November 2020, the applicant filed his Notice of Motion to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) against this Court’s (Au JA and ST Poon J) judgment of 10 November 2020 (“the Judgment”) [2020] HKCA 912.

2. In the Judgment, we dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan dated 1 June 2020 [2020] HKCFI 470 refusing the applicant leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulment Claims Petition Office (“the Board”) dated 2 February 2018 (“the Board’s Decision”).

3. 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, pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, we see no reason to deviate from the usual practice and proceed to consider this application without an oral hearing.

4. 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 CFA at the discretion of this Court or the CFA 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 CFA for decision.

5. The Applicant has set out the following matters in his Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the CFA:

“1) i did not know failure to attend hearing would cost me an appeal hearing. i specially requested for one. I suppose i relied too much on my friends as no translation was given to me. i have no idea how to make grounds for judicial review.

2) Judges were procedurally unfair because there was a significant in the part where I could not obtainduring my hearing. this is of particular importance as the Board did not find me a credible witness.

3) I accepted that Nod and TCAB give me freedom to talk everything clearly as the deputy judge asked me about freedom, but the judges did not notice that i request for a hearing that i missed in TCAB hearing. there were the significance in the TCAB hearing that i could not attend the TCAB hearing.” [...

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