MUHAMMAD ASHRAF v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The applicant failed to show any realistic prospect of success under section 37ZO; the Director's decision was not shown to be unlawful or procedurally defective on the papers; leave to apply for judicial review is refused and, because the applicant is likely to continue to issue repetitive proceedings to remain in Hong Kong, a Restricted Proceedings Order is justified under the court's inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4797
Parties
Applicant: Muhammad Ashraf; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 October 2025
Case Number
HCAL1400/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused; Decision on Papers and Restricted Proceedings Order Made
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicant
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Restricted Proceedings Order, Abuse of Process, Section 37 ZO Immigration Ordinance, Torture Risk, Hong Kong Bill of Rights (articles 2 and 3), Refugee Convention Article 33
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Restricted Proceedings Order Abuse of Process Section 37 ZO Immigration Ordinance +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Ashraf

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused; Decision on Papers and Restricted Proceedings Order Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director complied with public law requirements in refusing the subsequent non-refoulement claim under section 37ZO
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated a significant change of circumstances giving the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to show any realistic prospect of success under section 37ZO; the Director's decision was not shown to be unlawful or procedurally defective on the papers; leave to apply for judicial review is refused and, because the applicant is likely to continue to issue repetitive proceedings to remain in Hong Kong, a Restricted Proceedings Order is justified under the court's inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicant

Orders

  • Applicant prohibited from commencing any fresh proceedings or continuing existing proceedings relating to any non-refoulement claim in the High Court or appeals without leave of the Court of First Instance
  • Applications for leave under this order to be made to Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung or designated Judge as specified