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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable ground of review or a realistic prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of delay were within its fact-finding remit and not shown to involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 6218
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
19 December 2025
Case Number
HCAL1182/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Credibility Assessment, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Standard
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Credibility Assessment +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 4 Authorities cited 6 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

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has a realistic prospect of success on a judicial review of the Board's decision
  2. 2 Whether the Board committed errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in its credibility findings and risk assessment
  3. 3 Whether delay in filing affected credibility and eligibility for protection under relevant statutes and instruments

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable ground of review or a realistic prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of delay were within its fact-finding remit and not shown to involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed