Re Singh Popinder

Court:High Court (Hong Kong)
Judgement Number:HCAL414/2017
Judgment Date:04 Nov 2019
Neutral Citation:[2019] HKCFI 2499
HCAL462/2018 RE SINGH POPINDER

HCAL 462/2018 and
HCAL 414/2017
(Consolidated)

[2019] HKCFI 2499

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 414 OF 2017

__________

RE: SINGH POPINDER Applicant

__________

AND

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 462 OF 2018

__________

RE: SINGH POPINDER Applicant

__________

(Consolidated)

Before: Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 14 August 2019

Date of Decision: 4 November 2019

__________

DECISION

__________

1. On 31 January 2018 Deputy High Court Judge Woodcock refused to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) dismissing his appeal regarding his non-refoulement claim upon finding none of the grounds put forward by him reasonably arguable for his intended challenge, that there was no error of law or procedural unfairness in the process before the Director/Board or its decision, and that there was no reasonable prospect of success in his intended application.

2. The Applicant then on 21 March 2018 filed another Form 86 under HCAL 462/2018 which was the statutory form for leave to apply for judicial review, but in it he stated that he was seeking leave to appeal against the decision of DHCJ Woodcock out of time, and in his supporting affirmation of the same date he confirmed his decision to appeal as follows:

“ The AP appeal out of time against the decision of deputy High Court Judge Woodcock dated 31-1-2018. AP seek leave to appeal out of time with reason copy of the judgment was not served on the AP in time to avoid from further delay the AP file the appeal. The AP will advance grounds of appeal after seeking legal expert advice on merit. It is therefore the AP humbly submit to admit the AP appeal out of time.” [sic]

3. At the hearing the Applicant again confirmed that it was all along his intention to appeal against the Court’s decision and not to apply again for judicial review, but instead of issuing a time summons for leave to appeal out of time, he wrongly used the Form 86 for the same as he claimed to be so advised by a friend. In the circumstances and in order to save time, I have decided to treat his application as one for leave to appeal out of time, and to deal with it accordingly...

To continue reading

Request your trial