SOREN SUME AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

SOREN SUME AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Extension of time to apply for leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicants filed about seven months late, offered no satisfactory explanation, and had no realistic prospect of success on their intended challenge to the Board's decision which was supported by evidence and lawful...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2496
Parties
1st Applicant (mother and Guardian Ad Litem): Soren Sume; 2nd Applicant (child): Jahangir Jarifa Khan; 3rd Applicant (child): Jahangir Ishak Khan; 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
4 October 2024
Case Number
HCAL380/2024
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Administrative Decision / Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Leave; Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Application dismissed; extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Standard of Review, State Protection, Child Specific Protection
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Extension of Time Judicial Review +3 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Soren Sume

1st Applicant (mother and Guardian Ad Litem)

Jahangir Jarifa Khan

2nd Applicant (child)

Jahangir Ishak Khan

3rd Applicant (child)

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Administrative Decision / Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Leave; Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for filing leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have a realistic prospect of success on their intended judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the Board and Director erred in fact-finding or law in rejecting non-refoulement/refugee claims

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time to apply for leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicants filed about seven months late, offered no satisfactory explanation, and had no realistic prospect of success on their intended challenge to the Board's decision which was supported by evidence and lawful fact-finding; accordingly the court dismissed the application and treated procedural non-compliance as a mere irregularity.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; extension of time refused

Orders

  • Extension of time to apply for leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Joint application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed