Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credibility and factual findings

Legal area

Court

27 Apr 2026

EKEJI GODFREY CHIBUIKE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2232
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL259/2022

The Leave Application is dismissed because the Applicant failed to particularise effective public law grounds; the Board provided adequate, comprehensive reasons and legitimately rejected the Applicant's credibility and factual claims, and there is no identifiable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality that would make the application reasonably arguable.
24 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2184
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2170/2023

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable public law ground or to make full and frank disclosure in Form 86, and the Board's factual findings that there was no real risk of harm were not vitiated by error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; therefore the intended judicial review had no realistic prospects of success.
27 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1649
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1758/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to plead grounds or make full disclosure, the Board's adverse credibility and factual findings were within its remit and showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the proposed challenge was not reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success.
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.
13 Feb 2026

ASHRAF MUHAMMAD JUNAID v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 122
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV963/2025

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable public law error in the Board's adverse credibility and factual findings or any error in the Judge's refusal of leave; the Court will not reassess the Board's factual conclusions absent error, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
30 Jan 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 499
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL77/2023

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to plead clear, particularised and reasonably arguable public law grounds; the Board's factual findings (including that the loan shark was fictitious and that state protection/internal relocation were available) did not disclose any reviewable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality such as would justify granting leave.
30 Dec 2025

MADBER ANOWAR HOSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6288
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1787/2020

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's findings; the Board's factual credibility findings and conclusions that the risks were unsubstantiated were supported by the evidence, and therefore the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review; leave was refused.
19 Dec 2025

LE THI MINH HANG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6268
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2510/2020

The application for leave was dismissed because the applicant failed to point to any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the TCAB decision, which had properly considered the evidence and legal principles and reasonably concluded allegations were insufficient and state protection and internal relocation were available; accordingly the challenge was not reasonably arguable.
19 Dec 2025

VUTHI XUAN THU v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6267
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2493/2020

The application for leave was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the TCAB decision, the TCAB had ample evidential basis for its findings (including availability of state protection and internal relocation), and there was no reasonably arguable case with a realistic prospect of success for judicial review.
5 Dec 2025

NAWAZ MUHAMMAD FAISAL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5798
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1385/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify grounds or make full disclosure in Form 86, the Board's factual findings that the claim was not plausible were lawfully reached after the applicant declined to answer questions, and there was no demonstrated error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality to give realistic prospects of success for judicial review.