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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's findings that state protection is available and internal relocation is viable meant none of the claimed risks were made out and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1542
Parties
Applicant: Kiswinarno; 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
17 March 2026
Case Number
HCAL172/2026
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Protection of Life (article 2 Hkbor), Prohibition of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (article 3 Hkbor), State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Standards (error of Law, Procedural Fairness, Irrationality)
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Protection of Life (article 2 Hkbor) +4 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kiswinarno

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 Stage (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally in dismissing the applicant's appeal
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture if returned (Immigration Ordinance Cap.115 Part VIIC)
  3. 3 Whether return would violate Article 2 (right to life) or Article 3 (CIDTP) of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's findings that state protection is available and internal relocation is viable meant none of the claimed risks were made out and the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed