ALI BABAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ALI BABAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the applicant's delay of approximately 1.5 months was substantial and inordinate, he failed to provide a good or valid reason for the delay (detention and claimed ignorance were insufficient given the decision had been sent to the prison), and there was no arguable merit to his intended challenge as neither the Director nor the Board committed any legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in finding low localized risk, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation alternatives.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 3245
Parties
Applicant: Ali Babar; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 August 2025
Case Number
HCAL811/2025
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Non Refoulement Decision / Application for Leave (extension of Time Sought); Leave Refused and Application Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Judicial Review Leave, Extension of Time, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Judicial Review Leave Extension of Time +2 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ali Babar

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Non Refoulement Decision / Application for Leave (extension of Time Sought); Leave Refused and Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time should be extended for filing leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board or Director erred in law or acted irrationally or procedurally unfairly in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's detention and alleged lack of awareness justify the delay

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the applicant's delay of approximately 1.5 months was substantial and inordinate, he failed to provide a good or valid reason for the delay (detention and claimed ignorance were insufficient given the decision had been sent to the prison), and there was no arguable merit to his intended challenge as neither the Director nor the Board committed any legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in finding low localized risk, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation alternatives.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review refused
  • The application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed