RE AMARJIT SINGH

RE AMARJIT SINGH

Extension refused because the applicant was almost ten months late, gave no satisfactory explanation for the delay or when he received the Order, failed to comply with directions to particularise grounds, had no arguable grounds of appeal, and granting extension would prejudice the respondent and public administration and constitute abuse of process.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 164
Parties
Applicant: Amarjit Singh; Proposed Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 January 2022
Case Number
HCAL1733/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons (in Chambers)
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Non Refoulement, Service and Notice, Procedural Fairness, Abuse of Process
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Non Refoulement Service and Notice Procedural Fairness +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amarjit Singh

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Proposed Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether to extend time for filing an appeal out of time
  2. 2 adequacy of explanation for nearly ten months' delay
  3. 3 whether there are arguable grounds of appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Extension refused because the applicant was almost ten months late, gave no satisfactory explanation for the delay or when he received the Order, failed to comply with directions to particularise grounds, had no arguable grounds of appeal, and granting extension would prejudice the respondent and public administration and constitute abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application for extension of time to appeal refused.