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

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

The applicant affirmed withdrawal and, applying Re Manik, there was nothing outstanding in the action; the court therefore amended Form 86 to correct party names and dismissed the application.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 5354
Parties
Applicant: Ali Kamran; 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
12 November 2025
Case Number
HCAL1651/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Form 86 amended to name Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office as Putative Respondent and the Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claims, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Judicial Review Procedure, Withdrawal of Application
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Claims Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Judicial Review Procedure +1 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ali Kamran

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 (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Form 86 should be amended to name the correct parties
  2. 2 Whether the application should be dismissed following the applicant's withdrawal
  3. 3 Whether any outstanding issue remained after withdrawal

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant affirmed withdrawal and, applying Re Manik, there was nothing outstanding in the action; the court therefore amended Form 86 to correct party names and dismissed the application.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Form 86 amended to name Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office as Putative Respondent and the Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party.

Orders

  • Form 86 be amended to name only the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office as Putative Respondent and the Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party.
  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed.