Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Cruel inhuman or degrading treatment

Legal area

Court

11 Feb 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 668
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1342/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant presented no specific or arguable legal ground, failed to show a realistic prospect of success, and the court lacks jurisdiction to order the Board or adjudicator to permit further oral engagement; the Board's factual findings that the claim was unsubstantiated were within its province and not susceptible to supervisory intervention.
15 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4715
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1235/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant's challenges were bare assertions without supporting evidence, the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by the record, and any identified legal error about obligation to give evidence was immaterial given the applicant in fact gave evidence; therefore the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.
13 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4446
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2272/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success; the Board's fact findings on state non-involvement, availability of state protection, credibility deficits and negligible real chance of harm were not shown to be legally flawed, procedurally unfair or irrational.
11 Apr 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 878
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1296/2019

Leave refused because the applicant failed to show any realistic prospect of success; the Board was entitled to reject the applicant's evidence on credibility, found low risk and availability of state protection and internal relocation, and no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated that would justify judicial review.
1 Dec 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2920
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1158/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any realistic prospect of success; the Board's findings that the risks were unlikely, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were not shown to be legally flawed, procedurally unfair or irrational.
15 Aug 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1996
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1215/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board's adverse credibility findings and risk assessment were within its fact-finding remit, there was no demonstrated error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.
30 May 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1338
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL816/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's factual findings were credible and its conclusions that state protection and internal relocation were available and that there was no real or substantial risk were within the Board's province and not Wednesbury unreasonable.
3 Jan 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 63
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL734/2019

Extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant's delay of over one year was serious and unexplained, the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success as the Board's findings involved no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury irrationality, and the Board reasonably found state protection and internal relocation available.
31 May 2022

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

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1634
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1082/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings were cogent and open on the material and there was no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.
15 Mar 2021

YASIN IMRAH BT NURDIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 589
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1230/2018

The court refused to extend time and refused leave because the applicant had not demonstrated good reason to extend time and had no reasonable prospect of success: the Board's findings that the risk was low, state protection was available and internal relocation viable were not legally flawed, procedurally unfair or irrational and therefore not susceptible to judicial review.