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

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

Extension of time was refused because the applicant was 21 days late, provided no valid or timely reasons to challenge the Board's factual findings, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success; therefore the court should not interfere with the Board's factual determinations and must dismiss the application for extension of time.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2008
Parties
Applicant: Pinto; 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
30 August 2024
Case Number
HCAL1458/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review; Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Decision on Application to Extend Time and Dismissal of Application
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Credibility Findings, Refusal of Judicial Interference With Administrative Findings, Time Limits for Filing Appeals
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Non Refoulement Judicial Review Procedural Law Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Credibility Findings +2 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pinto

Applicant

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; Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Decision on Application to Extend Time and Dismissal of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to file notice of appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal has a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the applicant provided valid reasons for delay

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused because the applicant was 21 days late, provided no valid or timely reasons to challenge the Board's factual findings, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success; therefore the court should not interfere with the Board's factual determinations and must dismiss the application for extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused and application dismissed

Orders

  • Extension of time refused
  • Application dismissed