Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appeal deadlines

Legal area

Court

26 Sept 2025

GARDIOLA JEANE LAGAC AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4460
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL896/2025

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay (one month and twenty days) was substantial compared with the 14‑day appeal period, the applicants provided no credible explanation or particulars of when they received the order, failed to set out arguable grounds of appeal as directed, and therefore there was no basis to exercise the court's discretion to extend time.
18 Apr 2024

LUI KING CHUN, THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF LAW DEI HEE aka LO TAI HI aka LO TAI HI, DECEASED v. KINZIE

Citation

[2024] HKDC 599
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ95/2023

The defendant failed to show a bona fide defence or triable issues: the counterclaim did not allege that the plaintiff authorized or knew of the alleged harassment, s.70B is a criminal provision and not a civil cause and the tenancy falls under Part IV; no pleaded set-off; rent covenant is independent; accordingly summary judgment for possession and arrears was properly upheld and the appeal dismissed.
31 Jul 2023

RE SRI-WAHYUNINGSIH

Citation

[2023] HKCA 905
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP397/2022

Extension of time to appeal was granted because, notwithstanding substantial delay, the intended appeal was reasonably arguable: the Board erred by declining to assess merits of the non-refoulement claims due to absence and the Judge erred in procedure; balance of factors favoured granting an extension and the applicant was ordered to file a notice of appeal within 28 days.
13 Jul 2023

NGUYEN THI THANH HOA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1761
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1298/2022

Although the applicant's 2-day delay was insignificant, she failed to particularise any grounds of appeal or identify errors in the decision; there was no reasonable prospect of success and it would be futile to extend time, therefore the application for extension was refused and the summons dismissed.
2 Mar 2023

BUI NGOC LE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 394
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL991/2021

Extension of time refused because the applicant was two months and eight days out of time, provided no reasonable explanation for the substantial delay, failed to comply with specific directions to file particulars and grounds, offered no prospect of success in the intended appeal, and granting an extension would prejudice the respondent and public administration and risk abuse of the non-refoulement protection system.
18 Jul 2022

RE SITI AISYAH

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1571
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL419/2019

Extension of time was granted because the delay was short (2 days), the applicant's late filing caused no demonstrated prejudice to the respondent, and in all the circumstances it was in the interests of justice to permit a 14-day extension despite the intended appeal having no real prospect of success.
28 Jun 2022

DOAN TRUNG KIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1923
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1349/2021

The Board lawfully applied s37ZT factors, the applicant's unexplained 4 months 26 days delay was inordinate and unjustified, the intended appeal was unmeritorious, and no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury irrationality was shown; therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.
16 Jul 2021

IQBAL MAZHAR ALIAS MAZHAR IQBAL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1506
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1418/2020

The court acceded to the lead applicant's unequivocal request to withdraw the leave application and dismissed the application for all three applicants because the children's claims were premised on and represented by the father as next friend; the application was also plainly out of time under Order 53 r4(1) and no basis for extension was advanced, reinforcing dismissal.
14 Aug 2019

FATAJO ABDOULIE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD /NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2031
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL60/2018

Refusal to grant an extension of time was justified because the applicant failed to provide an acceptable, credible explanation for the delay and the underlying judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success.
6 Feb 2007

THE LEIGHTON PARK TRUST v. HUYNH FAI

Citation

THE LEIGHTON PARK TRUST v. HUYNH FAI
Court

District Court
Case number

DCMP1610/2006

The appeal is dismissed because the defendant may not challenge the existing summary judgment without having pursued a timely appeal; the grounds advanced are either irrelevant to the present appeal or lack merit, therefore the order appealed against is upheld and costs are awarded to the plaintiff.