BASIR MUH ABDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

BASIR MUH ABDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for extension of time was refused because the leave application was filed beyond the three-month limit and the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on the merits; the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated, state protection was available, BOR 2 and BOR 3 were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1647
Parties
Applicant: Basir Muh Abdul; 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
1 April 2026
Case Number
HCAL1441/2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Application for Leave and Application for Extension of Time (refused)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic), Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 2 (right to Life), Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 3 (cidtp), Internal Relocation, Limitation/extension of Time for JR
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee/asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic) Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 2 (right to Life) +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Basir Muh Abdul

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 for Judicial Review / Application for Leave and Application for Extension of Time (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time should be granted for late leave application
  2. 2 Whether applicant has a real prospect of success on proposed judicial review
  3. 3 Standard of review applicable to Board decisions (scope of supervisory jurisdiction)

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the leave application was filed beyond the three-month limit and the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on the merits; the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated, state protection was available, BOR 2 and BOR 3 were not engaged, the matter did not meet the statutory definition of torture and internal relocation was viable were within the Board's fact-finding province and not shown to involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, therefore leave is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • The extension of time for the application for judicial review is refused
  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed