BACHITAR SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

BACHITAR SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to provide an acceptable and prompt explanation for the delay, did not take reasonable steps to notify the court or progress his application after release, and the underlying judicial review application had no arguable merit; in all the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1098
Parties
Applicant: Bachitar 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
24 April 2019
Case Number
HCAL999/2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave) / Decision on Summons for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Summons dated 19 February 2019 dismissed; extension of time to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Appeal Time Limits, Service of Documents, Detention, Procedural Compliance, Merits Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Appeal Time Limits Service of Documents +3 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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bachitar Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave) / Decision on Summons for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an extension of time to appeal the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided an adequate explanation for delay
  3. 3 Whether the underlying judicial review application has arguable merit

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to provide an acceptable and prompt explanation for the delay, did not take reasonable steps to notify the court or progress his application after release, and the underlying judicial review application had no arguable merit; in all the circumstances it was not in the interests of justice to grant an extension.

Court Disposition

Summons dated 19 February 2019 dismissed; extension of time to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Summons dated 19 February 2019 dismissed.
  • Extension of time to appeal against the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review is refused.