GARDIOLA JEANE LAGAC AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

GARDIOLA JEANE LAGAC AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay (one month and twenty days) was substantial compared with the 14‑day appeal period, the applicants provided no credible explanation or particulars of when they received the order, failed to set out arguable grounds of appeal as directed, and therefore there was no basis to exercise the court's discretion to extend time.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4460
Parties
1st Applicant: Gardiola Jeane Lagac; 2nd Applicant: Singh Alvinder Lagac; 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
26 September 2025
Case Number
HCAL896/2025
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons (in Chambers)
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Appeal Deadlines, Non Refoulement, Torture Claims
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Appeal Deadlines Non Refoulement +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gardiola Jeane Lagac

1st Applicant

Singh Alvinder Lagac

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time to appeal a judge's refusal of leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicants provided a credible explanation for the delay
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal discloses arguable grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay (one month and twenty days) was substantial compared with the 14‑day appeal period, the applicants provided no credible explanation or particulars of when they received the order, failed to set out arguable grounds of appeal as directed, and therefore there was no basis to exercise the court's discretion to extend time.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused

Orders

  • Application for extension of time to appeal refused