ALI ASHRAF AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

ALI ASHRAF AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The applicants failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success on judicial review because the reconstituted Board conducted a comprehensive and lawful assessment, its adverse credibility findings and rejection of medical and vulnerability claims were supported by the evidence, and supervisory review does not permit the court to substitute its own factual findings for those of the Board; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 2226
Parties
1st Applicant (father): Ali Ashraf; 2nd Applicant (mother): Khatoon Mahmooda; 3rd Applicant (eldest Son): Ali Ayan; 4th Applicant (daughter): Ali Mansha; 5th Applicant (younger Son): Ali Ehan; 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
29 April 2026
Case Number
HCAL146/2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review: Leave to Apply (non Refoulement/torture/persecution) / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused and joint application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance), Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor), CIDTP (article 3 Hkbor), Persecution (refugee Convention Article 33), Judicial Review Leave, Credibility Findings, Standard of Supervisory Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance) Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor) +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ali Ashraf

1st Applicant (father)

Khatoon Mahmooda

2nd Applicant (mother)

Ali Ayan

3rd Applicant (eldest Son)

Ali Mansha

4th Applicant (daughter)

Ali Ehan

5th Applicant (younger Son)

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review: Leave to Apply (non Refoulement/torture/persecution) / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants have a realistic prospect of success on judicial review of the Board's reconstituted decision
  2. 2 Whether the Board complied with public law requirements in assessing credibility and evidence
  3. 3 Whether the Court should interfere with primary fact-finding by the Director and the Board

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success on judicial review because the reconstituted Board conducted a comprehensive and lawful assessment, its adverse credibility findings and rejection of medical and vulnerability claims were supported by the evidence, and supervisory review does not permit the court to substitute its own factual findings for those of the Board; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused and joint application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Non-compliance with Order 80, rule 2 treated as a mere irregularity without rendering the applications of the 4th and 5th applicants nullities