SAMMAR AHMED v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Because the applicant voluntarily withdrew the leave application and obtained a visa leaving nothing outstanding, the court dismissed the application pursuant to the authority in Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 rather than leaving the action at large.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2023] HKCFI 1733
Parties: Applicant: Sammar Ahmed; 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: 7 July 2023
Case Number: HCAL8/2022
Procedural Posture: Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Application for Leave Dismissed Following Applicant's Withdrawal
Outcome: Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics: Non Refoulement, Asylum, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Withdrawal of Proceedings
Source Language: en

Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Asylum Judicial Review Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +1 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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2

Parties

Sammar Ahmed

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 Leave Dismissed Following Applicant's Withdrawal

Legal Issues

1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
2 Whether the court should dismiss the leave application after the applicant sought to withdraw because nothing remained outstanding

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.