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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the NOA was lodged 13 days late without a reasonable explanation or special circumstances under the statutory test; the Board correctly applied the law, relied on the binding 2015 Decision which negated merits of a BOR 2 claim, and its 2020 Decision was neither procedurally unfair nor irrational and therefore had no realistic prospect of being successfully judicially reviewed.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 511
Parties
1st Applicant: Jaspreet Kaur; 2nd Applicant: Gagga Ekamjot Singh; 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
27 January 2026
Case Number
HCAL1597/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (application for Leave to Apply) / Leave Stage Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time/late Filing, Wednesbury Irrationality
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional/human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time/late Filing Wednesbury Irrationality

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaspreet Kaur

1st Applicant

Gagga Ekamjot Singh

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (application for Leave to Apply) / Leave Stage Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the late filing of the Notice of Appeal should be allowed under the Immigration Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally or procedurally unfairly in refusing to extend time
  3. 3 Whether the applicant’s BOR 2 (non-refoulement) claim had arguable merit given the earlier final 2015 Decision

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the NOA was lodged 13 days late without a reasonable explanation or special circumstances under the statutory test; the Board correctly applied the law, relied on the binding 2015 Decision which negated merits of a BOR 2 claim, and its 2020 Decision was neither procedurally unfair nor irrational and therefore had no realistic prospect of being successfully judicially reviewed.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review be refused