Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Burden of proof

Legal area

Court

14 May 2026

LUONG THI HUONG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2704
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL695/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board correctly applied the law under the USM, fairly assessed and accepted the applicant's evidence but reasonably found it insufficient to establish torture, persecution or a well-founded fear of return, and there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury irrationality in the Decision; therefore the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success.
28 Apr 2026

LEE WOON PING v. SMART DRAGON ASIA PACIFIC LTD

Citation

[2026] HKDC 754
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ844/2020

On the evidence the court inferred that seepage at least partly originated from Flat 5E: abatement of seepage when flushwater supply to Flat 5E was suspended, high chloride content and dye (fluorescein) observed on plaintiff's ceiling and expert findings established a causal link to Flat 5E's flushwater/floor drainage; the defendant knew or ought to have known and failed to take reasonable steps to repair; therefore defendant liable in nuisance and negligence and injunctive relief and damages were appropriate.
23 Apr 2026

ISTIQOMAH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2250
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1570/2023

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility finding was supported by the evidence and hearing, and the Director and Board properly concluded that any risk was localized and that reasonable internal relocation and state protection in Indonesia were available; judicial review is not a rehearing of these factual assessments.
22 Apr 2026

PURNAMASARI YULI acting as guardian ad litem of YULI PURNAMASARI SEINA YUKARI GASHEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2029
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1310/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success or arguable public law error: the Board reasonably found state protection, welfare and education would be available in Indonesia, language and relocation issues were resolvable, and there was no basis for upsetting the Board's factual findings.
21 Apr 2026

RASOOL GHULAM v. NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1349
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1354/2020

Leave was refused because the Form 86 failed to identify any reasonably arguable grounds; the NRCPO's refusal of late filing displayed no procedural unfairness, error of law or irrationality under the enhanced Wednesbury standard; and remittal would be futile because there was no realistic prospect of a different outcome given prior findings rejecting the substantive non-refoulement claims.
20 Apr 2026

香港特別行政區訴張子健

Citation

[2026] HKDC 745
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCC1058/2024

Although the prosecution's search evidence and witness identification of the cash location were accepted, the prosecution failed on the balance of probabilities to establish a prima facie link between the RMB12,100 and the defendant's drug trafficking; consequently the burden did not validly shift to the defendant and the court ordered the RMB12,100 returned.
10 Apr 2026

何文輝對李琇詠

Citation

[2026] HKDC 578
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ2068/2023

The court found the defendant not credible but concluded the plaintiff nevertheless failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the six disputed cash loans were made on the pleaded dates due to lack of corroborating evidence; the defendant had admitted owing HK$143,600 which the court ordered to be paid together with costs.
2 Apr 2026

GMT INDUSTRIAL LTD v. FAN RONG LI AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1982
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA546/2015

The summons for leave to appeal out of time and for a stay of execution was dismissed because the applicant had a substantial inexcusable delay (about four months and ten days) and failed to show a strongly arguable case on the merits: the trial judge's factual findings (that the defendant did not discharge the evidential burden to justify the payments and that alleged indebtedness was unproven) were supported by the evidence and not plainly wrong, so no extension or stay should be granted.
27 Mar 2026

PHAM THI QUYEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1750
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL568/2022

Leave refused because the Board correctly applied the law and key legal principles, its further findings of fact were within its exclusive remit, no error of law or procedural unfairness was shown, the Decision met the enhanced Wednesbury standard and the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success.
25 Mar 2026

香港特別行政區訴譚勝健

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1101
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA43/2025

The court accepted the contemporaneous dashcam (P4) and witness evidence showing the appellant was driving at speed in the inner lane, did not signal or slow, and deliberately cut left into the complainant's lane causing the collision; those facts established careless driving beyond reasonable doubt and warranted upholding conviction and fine.