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

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

Extension of time refused because delay of nine months and twenty-one days was very substantial, the applicant failed to update his address and therefore did not have a valid explanation for non-receipt of the order, he advanced no arguable grounds and his intended appeal had no prospect of success, and granting extension would prejudice the respondent and amount to abuse of process.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 812
Parties
Applicant: Gurmail; 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
24 March 2023
Case Number
HCAL540/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Decision on Summons for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Non Refoulement Claims, Procedural Fairness, Service and Change of Address, Abuse of Process
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Judicial Review Procedural Law Public International Law (non Refoulement) Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Non Refoulement Claims +3 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gurmail

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Decision on Summons for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Length and reason for delay in filing appeal
  2. 2 Whether applicant had arguable grounds/prospect of success on appeal
  3. 3 Applicant's duty to inform court of change of address and consequences of failure

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time refused because delay of nine months and twenty-one days was very substantial, the applicant failed to update his address and therefore did not have a valid explanation for non-receipt of the order, he advanced no arguable grounds and his intended appeal had no prospect of success, and granting extension would prejudice the respondent and amount to abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application for extension of time to appeal refused.