VY THI AN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

VY THI AN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant was 2 years and 9 months late with no explanation and the delay was inordinate; the intended judicial review had no prospect of success because the Director and the Board reasonably found the risk to be low, identified state protection and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4848
Parties
Applicant: Vy Thi An; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 October 2025
Case Number
HCAL2329/2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused); Application for Extension of Time (refused)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Extension of Time, Standard of Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation +3 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vy Thi An

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused); Application for Extension of Time (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should extend time for an application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether there is an arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the decisions of the Director or the Torture Claims Appeal Board
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of harm amounting to torture or persecution if returned to Vietnam

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant was 2 years and 9 months late with no explanation and the delay was inordinate; the intended judicial review had no prospect of success because the Director and the Board reasonably found the risk to be low, identified state protection and reasonable internal relocation, and there was no identifiable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for judicial review be refused
  • Leave to apply for judicial review be refused