LESTARI DESI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

LESTARI DESI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedurally unfair conduct by the Director or the Board, presented only bare assertions without particulars, did not attend the appeal hearing undermining credibility, the Board reasonably found any risk to be low and that internal relocation was available, and judicial review cannot be used to rehear merits absent demonstrated legal error; moreover the applicant later confirmed withdrawal and resolution of issues, removing any prospect of success.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1214
Parties
Applicant: Lestari Desi; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 March 2026
Case Number
HCAL990/2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application Dismissed
Outcome
The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Screening and Appeal Procedures
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Non Refoulement Torture Risk Procedural Fairness +4 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lestari Desi

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in its credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in refusal to accept untranslated documents or conduct of translator
  3. 3 Whether the risk from private creditors amounted to torture or persecution attracting non-refoulement protection

Ratio Decidendi

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedurally unfair conduct by the Director or the Board, presented only bare assertions without particulars, did not attend the appeal hearing undermining credibility, the Board reasonably found any risk to be low and that internal relocation was available, and judicial review cannot be used to rehear merits absent demonstrated legal error; moreover the applicant later confirmed withdrawal and resolution of issues, removing any prospect of success.

Court Disposition

The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
  • No leave granted and matter closed