SWARI NILA SAHABTI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

SWARI NILA SAHABTI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The subsequent claim (HCAL 1662/2025) was struck out as a duplicative abuse of process under established authority; leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's Decision in HCAL 2390/2024 was refused because applicants failed to identify arguable legal error, procedural unfairness, or Wednesbury-unreasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 6427
Parties
1st Applicant: Swari Nila Sahabti; 2nd Applicant: Swari Afnan Akando; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 December 2025
Case Number
HCAL2390/2024
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application and Strike Out of Subsequent Claim
Outcome
HCAL 1662/2025 struck out; leave to apply for judicial review in HCAL 2390/2024 refused; joint application dismissed; non-compliance with Order 80 r.2 RHC treated as a mere irregularity.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Refugee Protection, Judicial Review, Abuse of Process, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Refugee Protection Judicial Review +2 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Swari Nila Sahabti

1st Applicant

Swari Afnan Akando

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application and Strike Out of Subsequent Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's Decision should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the later/subsequent claim is a duplicate and an abuse of process and should be struck out
  3. 3 Whether the Board committed legal error or procedural unfairness in fact-finding such that relief by judicial review is realistically arguable

Ratio Decidendi

The subsequent claim (HCAL 1662/2025) was struck out as a duplicative abuse of process under established authority; leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's Decision in HCAL 2390/2024 was refused because applicants failed to identify arguable legal error, procedural unfairness, or Wednesbury-unreasonable findings such that there was no realistic prospect of success; procedural non-compliance (Order 80 r.2 RHC) was treated as a mere irregularity and not a nullity.

Court Disposition

HCAL 1662/2025 struck out; leave to apply for judicial review in HCAL 2390/2024 refused; joint application dismissed; non-compliance with Order 80 r.2 RHC treated as a mere irregularity.

Orders

  • Strike out HCAL 1662 of 2025 (subsequent claim) as abuse/duplication of proceedings
  • Refuse leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's Decision in HCAL 2390 of 2024 and dismiss the joint application