15 Jun 2023
Extension of time was refused because the intended judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success: the applicant's grounds were devoid of merit, the judge had given adequate reasons, no error of law was identified, and the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of state protection were permissible and dispositive.
30 Apr 2021
Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable public law error, the new grounds raised on appeal were introduced too late and relate to the Board's merits rather than the judge's decision, and there was no evidence that the Board's decision was unfair or irrational such as to give the applicant a reasonable prospect of success.
31 Dec 2020
Refusal to extend time: the applicant was nearly two months out of time, provided an unsubstantiated and nonspecific explanation, failed to lodge directed submissions, and the intended grounds of appeal were bare assertions lacking particularised errors and had no real prospect of success; further, no question of great general or public importance was shown under s22(1)(b) HKCFAO, therefore extension and leave are refused.
27 May 2019
Leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any error in the Court of Appeal's conclusion that he had not advanced effective arguments capable of reversing the judge's decision and did not raise any question of great general or public importance as required by section 22(1)(b) Cap 484.
18 Mar 2019
The application for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify viable grounds to overturn the lower court's decision, did not engage with the Court of Appeal's reasons, failed to raise the counsel-performance complaint previously, presented no basis for state acquiescence or involvement, and did not satisfy the statutory leave criterion in s22(1)(b) of Cap 484.
27 Dec 2018
The appeal is dismissed because it was not validly constituted as no leave to appeal was sought under s14AA High Court Ordinance and, alternatively, the Judge correctly refused to extend time for the out-of-time leave application and correctly concluded the intended judicial review had no prospect of success.