FRISCA AYUDYA ARYANI AND ANOTHER v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

FRISCA AYUDYA ARYANI AND ANOTHER v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The immigration officer correctly applied section 37ZO, considered prior findings and the new material, and lawfully concluded there was no significant change and no realistic prospect of success; the decision was procedurally fair and not irrational, therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 2709
Parties
1st Applicant: Frisca Ayudya Aryani; 2nd Applicant: Shah Syed Aryan Hussain alias Frisca Ayudya Aryani Oq Ferdianshah P; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 May 2026
Case Number
HCAL207/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Subsequent Claim, Unified Screening Mechanism, Section 37 ZO Immigration Ordinance, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Constitutional and Administrative Law Asylum and Refugee Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Subsequent Claim Unified Screening Mechanism Section 37 ZO Immigration Ordinance +1 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frisca Ayudya Aryani

1st Applicant

Shah Syed Aryan Hussain alias Frisca Ayudya Aryani Oq Ferdianshah P

2nd Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director lawfully refused permission to make a subsequent non-refoulement claim under section 37ZO
  2. 2 Whether there was a significant change in circumstances since the previous claim was finally determined
  3. 3 Whether the new material gives the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The immigration officer correctly applied section 37ZO, considered prior findings and the new material, and lawfully concluded there was no significant change and no realistic prospect of success; the decision was procedurally fair and not irrational, therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.