Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Access to legal representation

Legal area

Court

26 Mar 2026

MAXIMO JENNIFER CONCHA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1627
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1198/2022

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant's grounds were vague or challenged factual determinations properly for the TCAB, the TCAB had taken into account all material evidence and applied correct legal principles, and there was no reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality to justify granting leave.
29 May 2024

LE THI MIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2024] HKCA 479
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP357/2023

Extension of time refused because the intended appeal lacked merit and a realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility findings were within its factual remit and not shown to be vitiated by public law error, so granting an extension would be futile despite the delay being largely technical.
8 Jul 2019

RE GREWAL JAGDEEP SINGH

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1584
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL920/2017

The judge held that the applicant's delay of over seven months was substantial and excessive and that the explanations offered (imprisonment and detention) did not sufficiently justify the delay, leading to dismissal of the application.
14 Jun 2019

DAS RATAN ALIAS SWAPAN BANIK v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1403
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL568/2018

The Adjudicator's decision was lawful and reasonable: there was no procedural unfairness, the applicant had access to interpretation and assistance, the appeal bundle timing complied with practice directions and was not prejudicial, lack of continued legal representation did not show prejudice, and the factual findings that risks were negligible and protection/relocation were available were not Wednesbury unreasonable; therefore the application for leave for judicial review has no realistic prospect of success and is refused.
31 May 2019

MOHAMMED KALIMUDDIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2019] HKCA 598
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV507/2018

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's grounds did not raise any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) of Cap 484 and there was no prospect of success in the intended appeal; procedural complaints did not meet the statutory threshold to warrant certification to the Court of Final Appeal.
30 Apr 2019

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

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 981
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL931/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant's complaints lacked reasonable arguability: the Adjudicator's adverse credibility findings and refusal of the non-refoulement claim were supported by evidence, the appeal bundle was served within the required timeframe, there was no procedural unfairness or error of law, and the Applicant failed to show real prejudice from lack of representation or language difficulties.

Hong Kong Case Law

MAXIMO JENNIFER CONCHA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

LE THI MIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RE GREWAL JAGDEEP SINGH

DAS RATAN ALIAS SWAPAN BANIK v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

MOHAMMED KALIMUDDIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

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