ENDANG TRI WAHYUNI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

ENDANG TRI WAHYUNI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The Board correctly applied the law and key legal principles, made fact-findings within its exclusive remit which were not shown to involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and its conclusion that the applicants failed to establish a factual basis for non-refoulement protection was within range of reasonable decisions; accordingly there was no realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review must be refused (with extension of time granted for the out-of-time application).

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 3839
Parties
1st Applicant: Endang Tri Wahyuni; 2nd Applicant: Gursewak Anmoldeep; 3rd Applicant: Endang-Tri-Wahyuni Anggelia Puspita; 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
28 August 2025
Case Number
HCAL1741/2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply for Judicial Review) / Leave Stage — Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review; Decision Refusing Leave
Outcome
Extension of time granted for HCAL 2319/2019; leave to apply for judicial review refused in both HCAL 2319/2019 and HCAL 1741/2021
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, United Screening Mechanism (usm), Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Wednesbury Irrationality, Burden and Standard of Proof, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Non Refoulement Law Civil Procedure Non Refoulement United Screening Mechanism (usm) Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +5 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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Endang Tri Wahyuni

1st Applicant

Gursewak Anmoldeep

2nd Applicant

Endang-Tri-Wahyuni Anggelia Puspita

3rd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply for Judicial Review) / Leave Stage — Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review; Decision Refusing Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to apply for leave should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Board committed any error of law or procedural unfairness
  3. 3 Whether the Board's factual findings were irrational or Wednesbury-unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Board correctly applied the law and key legal principles, made fact-findings within its exclusive remit which were not shown to involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and its conclusion that the applicants failed to establish a factual basis for non-refoulement protection was within range of reasonable decisions; accordingly there was no realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review must be refused (with extension of time granted for the out-of-time application).

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted for HCAL 2319/2019; leave to apply for judicial review refused in both HCAL 2319/2019 and HCAL 1741/2021

Orders

  • Both applications to be heard together
  • Extension of time to apply for leave granted in HCAL 2319/2019