NGUYEN BUI HIEN AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

NGUYEN BUI HIEN AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Refuse extension of time and dismiss the leave application because the applicants filed more than five months late, failed to provide evidence beyond bare assertions to show a realistic prospect of success on judicial review, and the Board had applied the correct legal principles (including separate child-specific analysis), did not act procedurally unfairly, and its findings were not Wednesbury unreasonable.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 1515
Parties
1st Applicant: Nguyen Bui Hien; 2nd Applicant: Nguyen Bui Vi; 3rd Applicant: Nguyen Thi Van Anh; 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
13 May 2025
Case Number
HCAL1199/2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Application for Leave and for Extension of Time to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Extension of time refused; joint application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture, Torture and CIDTP, Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Child Specific Asylum Considerations, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture Torture and CIDTP Judicial Review +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nguyen Bui Hien

1st Applicant

Nguyen Bui Vi

2nd Applicant

Nguyen Thi Van Anh

3rd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Application for Leave and for Extension of Time to Apply for Judicial Review

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 judicial review of the Board's Decision
  3. 3 Whether the Board committed procedural unfairness or misapplied the law (including child-specific considerations)

Ratio Decidendi

Refuse extension of time and dismiss the leave application because the applicants filed more than five months late, failed to provide evidence beyond bare assertions to show a realistic prospect of success on judicial review, and the Board had applied the correct legal principles (including separate child-specific analysis), did not act procedurally unfairly, and its findings were not Wednesbury unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; joint application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Form 86 amended to name the Torture Claims Appeal Board as proposed respondent and the Director of Immigration as interested party
  • Refuse to extend time for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's Decision dated 23 November 2023