FARIS MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

FARIS MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant filed almost four months late without any explanation, failed to articulate any reasonably arguable legal ground of challenge, and the Board's and Director's decisions showed no error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness given...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4914
Parties
Applicant: Faris Muhammad; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 October 2025
Case Number
HCAL1654/2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (extension of Time Refused; Leave Dismissed)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture / Article 3 HKBOR, Delay and Extension of Time, Judicial Review Standard of Review, Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture / Article 3 HKBOR Delay and Extension of Time Judicial Review Standard of Review +2 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faris Muhammad

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (extension of Time Refused; Leave Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time should be extended for an out-of-time application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the intended judicial review raises reasonably arguable errors of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision
  3. 3 Whether the Board and Director erred in assessing risk, credibility and availability of state protection and internal relocation

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant filed almost four months late without any explanation, failed to articulate any reasonably arguable legal ground of challenge, and the Board's and Director's decisions showed no error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness given credibility findings, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation alternatives.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review of the decision of Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 17 January 2020 be refused
  • The application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed