OMAR OUBELLA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

OMAR OUBELLA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Extension of time refused because although the delay was short, the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for late filing, failed to identify or particularize any error of law or unfairness in the Board's Decision and thus had no realistic prospect of success on appeal.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 2470
Parties
Applicant: Omar Oubella; 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 June 2025
Case Number
HCAL1967/2024
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (chambers Hearing and Decision)
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non‑refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Delay, Credibility Findings, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration Law Judicial Review Non‑refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time Delay +2 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Omar Oubella

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Extension of Time to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal (chambers Hearing and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an extension of time to appeal against an order refusing leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay and a real prospect of success on appeal
  3. 3 Whether the applicant complied with the obligation to provide a valid address for service

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time refused because although the delay was short, the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for late filing, failed to identify or particularize any error of law or unfairness in the Board's Decision and thus had no realistic prospect of success on appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time to file appeal refused
  • Time application dismissed