馬志清及另一人 對 入境事務處處長及另二人

馬志清及另一人 對 入境事務處處長及另二人

The application for extension of time was dismissed because the applicants delayed about one month beyond the appeal deadline without reasonable explanation, and there was no real prospect of success: the applicants’ right to reside depended on a marriage held to be void, the Director lawfully relied on verification that the one-way permits were illegally obtained, there was no evidence of abuse of power in permitting earlier entry, and the time taken by the Director to investigate did not render the later cancellation and removal decisions challengeable.

Citation
馬志清及另一人 對 入境事務處處長及另二人
Parties
First Applicant: 馬志清; Second Applicant: 林舒麗; First Respondent: 入境事務處處長; Second Respondent: 入境事務審裁處; Third Respondent: 人事登記處處長
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 May 2014
Case Number
HCMP3423/2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review — Leave Application and Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Court of Appeal Determination of Extension of Time Following Refusal of Leave by Trial Judge
Outcome
Application dismissed; applicants ordered to pay respondents' costs.
Legal Topics
Deportation, Cancellation of Identity Documents, Extension of Time to Appeal, Validity of Marriage, Illegal Entry
Source Language
CH
Immigration Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Deportation Cancellation of Identity Documents Extension of Time to Appeal Validity of Marriage Illegal Entry

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

馬志清

First Applicant

林舒麗

Second Applicant

入境事務處處長

First Respondent

入境事務審裁處

Second Respondent

人事登記處處長

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review — Leave Application and Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Court of Appeal Determination of Extension of Time Following Refusal of Leave by Trial Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether Director of Immigration lawfully cancelled stay and identity cards and issued removal orders
  3. 3 Whether the applicants had an arguable basis given that the underlying marriage was void

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was dismissed because the applicants delayed about one month beyond the appeal deadline without reasonable explanation, and there was no real prospect of success: the applicants’ right to reside depended on a marriage held to be void, the Director lawfully relied on verification that the one-way permits were illegally obtained, there was no evidence of abuse of power in permitting earlier entry, and the time taken by the Director to investigate did not render the later cancellation and removal decisions challengeable.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; applicants ordered to pay respondents' costs.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Applicants ordered to pay respondents' costs assessed at HKD 10,000 each.