EFENDI JUNAIDI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

EFENDI JUNAIDI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant offered no valid reason for the 20-day delay, the Court's decision had been validly served to his last known address and he was deemed to have received it, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's finding that the non-refoulement claim was unsubstantiated; on balance the extension factors weighed against granting relief.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 992
Parties
Applicant: Efendi Junaidi; 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
25 February 2026
Case Number
HCAL1182/2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (refused)
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Non Refoulement (torture) Claim, Service by Post and Deemed Receipt, Merits Assessment
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Procedural Law Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Non Refoulement (torture) Claim Service by Post and Deemed Receipt +1 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Efendi Junaidi

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether to extend time for appeal
  2. 2 whether the applicant was deemed to have received the Court's decision
  3. 3 whether the intended appeal has a realistic prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant offered no valid reason for the 20-day delay, the Court's decision had been validly served to his last known address and he was deemed to have received it, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's finding that the non-refoulement claim was unsubstantiated; on balance the extension factors weighed against granting relief.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for appeal refused
  • Applicant's application dismissed