The CA says it is unjust to reject a appeal only on the ground of late filing, especially if it is meritorious |
In a rare move, the Court of Appeal has granted a Filipina former
domestic worker permission to seek a judicial review of the government’s
rejection of her non-refoulement claim, or a petition against being sent home.
Chona M. Atienza, who had overstayed her visa for two
years before applying for refugee status in 2018, had told the Immigration
Director that she feared being harmed or killed by a former boyfriend if she
was forced to go back to the Philippines .
The Director rejected her non-refoulement claim, saying her
fear was groundless, and that what happened between her and her boyfriend was a
private matter. She was also told that there are other places in the Philippines she
could move to if she truly feared for her safety.
Call us! |
She then sought leave for a judicial review of the Director
and the TCAB decisions, but Deputy High Court Judge K W Lung dismissed her application
on Aug 7 last year for lack of prosecution. This was after Atienza failed to
show up for an oral hearing which Judge Lung had set for that day.
Atienza then went to the CA, which granted her appeal after a hearing on Dec. 17.
Atienza told the court the
TCAB rejected her appeal against the Director’s decision because it was lodged
only on Apr 20, 2018, three days after the 14-day filing period. She said she thought
the time for appeal would be counted from the time she received the decision on
Apr 10 that year.
In their reasons for judgment handed down on Jan. 3, Judges Aarif
Barma, Albert Wong and Lisa Wong said they believed her reason for late filing.
They also said: “It would be unjust not to allow the late filing of a notice of
appeal where the appeal is meritorious. Indeed, nothing would be more unjust.”
CALL OUR HOTLINE |
The CA said the Board should have taken into account the
merits of Atienza’s appeal regardless of the procedural breach (or its being
filed out of time) or its opinion that the applicant had not provided a
credible explanation for the breach.