HOSSAIN AHMED AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

HOSSAIN AHMED AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted in HCAL 1101 because the amended grounds in AF 86/1101 met the Po Fun Chan test of being reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success; HCAL 796/2018 and HCAL 2644/2019 were dismissed as academic because they had been superseded by subsequent claims, appeals and the 2022 Board Decision; costs orders were exercised accordingly.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2165
Parties
1st Applicant: HOSSAIN Ahmed; 2nd Applicant: HOSSAIN Farjana; 3rd Applicant: AHMED Masrur; 4th Applicant: HOSSAIN Marzaan; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration; Putative Respondent: Master Reuden Lai, Deputy Registrar of the High Court; Putative Interested Party: Director of Legal Aid
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 August 2024
Case Number
HCAL796/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Applications / Decision on Leave Applications
Outcome
Leave granted in HCAL 1101; HCAL 796 and HCAL 2644 dismissed as academic
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claims, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Legal Aid
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Claims Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Legal Aid

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

HOSSAIN Ahmed

1st Applicant

HOSSAIN Farjana

2nd Applicant

AHMED Masrur

3rd Applicant

HOSSAIN Marzaan

4th Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Master Reuden Lai, Deputy Registrar of the High Court

Putative Respondent

Director of Legal Aid

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Applications / Decision on Leave Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted to challenge the 2022 Board Decision
  2. 2 Whether the earlier JR applications (HCAL 796/2018 and HCAL 2644/2019) are academic/superseded
  3. 3 What duties arise under Article 3 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance regarding refoulement of seriously ill minors

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted in HCAL 1101 because the amended grounds in AF 86/1101 met the Po Fun Chan test of being reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success; HCAL 796/2018 and HCAL 2644/2019 were dismissed as academic because they had been superseded by subsequent claims, appeals and the 2022 Board Decision; costs orders were exercised accordingly.

Court Disposition

Leave granted in HCAL 1101; HCAL 796 and HCAL 2644 dismissed as academic

Orders

  • Grant leave to all applicants in HCAL 1101 on all four grounds as stated in AF 86/1101
  • Dismiss HCAL 796/2018 as academic; no order as to costs