MR SUMON v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

MR SUMON v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Refusal to extend time was justified because the applicant's delay of over two months was substantial and inordinate, he failed to provide credible evidence to excuse the delay, and he failed to identify any arguable error or otherwise demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success in the intended appeal, making extension futile.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2317
Parties
Applicant: MR SUMON; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 September 2024
Case Number
HCAL607/2019
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons (chambers)
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused and summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Service of Decision, Prospect of Success
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Refugee and Asylum Law Non Refoulement Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Procedural Fairness Service of Decision +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MR SUMON

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for filing an appeal against refusal of leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a credible reason for a delay of over two months
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal has any reasonable prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

Refusal to extend time was justified because the applicant's delay of over two months was substantial and inordinate, he failed to provide credible evidence to excuse the delay, and he failed to identify any arguable error or otherwise demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success in the intended appeal, making extension futile.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused and summons dismissed.

Orders

  • Refuse application for extension of time to appeal against the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review; dismiss the summons.