NGUYEN THI LAN 對 TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

NGUYEN THI LAN 對 TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any error in the Court of Appeal's unless order, failed to comply with court directions or seek timely relief from sanction, and did not demonstrate that any proposed appeal raised issues of wide public importance as required by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCA 1131
Parties
Applicant: Nguyen Thi Lan; Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 December 2024
Case Number
CACV291/2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (civil Judicial Review / Immigration) / Leave Application on Motion Decided on Papers; Motion Dismissed and Leave Refused
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed and leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Leave to Appeal to Court of Final Appeal, Non Compliance With Court Directions, Non Refoulement (torture Claim)
Source Language
ch
Administrative Law Immigration Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Leave to Appeal to Court of Final Appeal Non Compliance With Court Directions Non Refoulement (torture Claim)

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nguyen Thi Lan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Respondent

Director of Immigration

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (civil Judicial Review / Immigration) / Leave Application on Motion Decided on Papers; Motion Dismissed and Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown that the proposed appeal raises issues of wide public importance under s22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the applicant complied with court directions and the unless order or provided sufficient grounds for relief from sanctions
  3. 3 Whether the notice of motion should be considered on paper

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any error in the Court of Appeal's unless order, failed to comply with court directions or seek timely relief from sanction, and did not demonstrate that any proposed appeal raised issues of wide public importance as required by s22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed and leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal refused

Orders

  • Dismiss the Notice of Motion filed on 8 December 2023
  • Refuse permission to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under s22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance