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

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

Extension of time refused because applicant was four days late, offered no valid or credible explanation for non-receipt of the Court's decision, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's finding that the non-refoulement claim was unsubstantiated; accordingly the application was dismissed.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1832
Parties
Applicant: Rony Md; 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
22 April 2026
Case Number
HCAL1231/2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave and Extension of Time to Appeal / Application for Extension of Time Refused; Underlying Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Dismissed
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused and application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Service and Deemed Receipt, Appeal Time Limits
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Non Refoulement Judicial Review Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rony Md

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave and Extension of Time to Appeal / Application for Extension of Time Refused; Underlying Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time for appeal filed 4 days late
  2. 2 Whether the applicant received the Court's decision and whether non-receipt excuses delay
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal has a realistic prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time refused because applicant was four days late, offered no valid or credible explanation for non-receipt of the Court's decision, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's finding that the non-refoulement claim was unsubstantiated; accordingly the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused and application dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time to appeal refused
  • Application dismissed