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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the TCAB Decision; the TCAB had lawfully and reasonably considered the evidence, applied correct legal principles, found insufficient severity of ill-treatment, and concluded state protection/internal relocation were available, so there was no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 220
Parties
Applicant: Subba Dipa; 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
12 February 2026
Case Number
HCAL2342/2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Form 86 amended to name only the TCAB as putative respondent and the Director of Immigration as putative interested party.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Judicial Review Leave to Apply Procedural Fairness Standard of Review

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Subba Dipa

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the TCAB decision contained errors of law
  3. 3 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the TCAB process

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the TCAB Decision; the TCAB had lawfully and reasonably considered the evidence, applied correct legal principles, found insufficient severity of ill-treatment, and concluded state protection/internal relocation were available, so there was no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Form 86 amended to name only the TCAB as putative respondent and the Director of Immigration as putative interested party.

Orders

  • Form 86 be amended, naming only the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office as the Putative Respondent and the Director of Immigration be named as the Putative Interested Party.
  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.