Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Dismissal for want of prosecution

Legal area

Court

26 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1732
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1820/2023

Applicant's withdrawal application was refused and her leave application dismissed for want of prosecution because she failed to comply with the Court's directions to file a confirmatory affirmation within the specified 14-day period, demonstrating a lack of intention to prosecute, and because on paper the Board's Decision disclosed no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness such that leave could not be granted.
3 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1064
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1696/2021

Because the Immigration Department granted the applicant permission to stay in Hong Kong and the applicant was absent from the hearing, the court concluded the applicant had no intention to proceed and dismissed the leave application as moot/for want of prosecution.
2 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1224
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL574/2022

The applicant validly and voluntarily elected to withdraw the leave application at the hearing; the court properly acceded to that voluntary withdrawal and dismissed the leave application without adjudicating the merits to conclude the proceedings and avoid leaving the action at large (applying Re Manik).
4 Feb 2026

NGUYEN HUU HOANG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 527
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1991/2025

Because the applicant voluntarily withdrew the application and there was no outstanding matter, the court correctly dismissed the application for leave to apply for judicial review rather than leaving the action at large, applying the cited authority and Order 53 procedure.
16 Jan 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 354
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1556/2021

The applicant's oral withdrawal was voluntary and uncoerced; the court accepted the withdrawal, amended the Form 86 to reclassify the Director of Immigration as a putative interested party, and dismissed the leave application without adjudicating the merits to avoid leaving the action at large.
31 Dec 2025

LAM KING NAM v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5773
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL58/2016

The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed for want of prosecution due to prolonged inaction by the Applicant; however, on the exercise of discretion the Commissioner’s historical costs are not ordered against the Applicant and there is no order as to costs.
28 Nov 2025

NURUL BAITI AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5791
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1176/2021

The extension of time was refused because the applicants had voluntarily indicated they would not prosecute by filing a withdrawal, failed to respond to directions, provided no reasonable or credible explanation for the substantial delay, and advanced grounds lacking any real prospect of success.
19 Nov 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5512
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2319/2024

The applicant lawfully withdrew the application, there was no evidence the withdrawal was not of his free will and no outstanding matter remained; therefore the court correctly acceded to the withdrawal and dismissed the leave application.
11 Nov 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5251
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1877/2020

The application for leave was dismissed because the applicant, having requested a hearing, failed to attend the scheduled hearing and thereby demonstrated no intention to proceed; the court also exercised its power to correct the party description by amending the Form 86 to name only the Director of Immigration as putative interested party.
7 Nov 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5243
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1736/2020

The applicant voluntarily and freely withdrew the leave application; the court therefore granted the withdrawal and dismissed the leave application without deciding the merits to prevent the action being left at large, applying the principle in Re Manik MD Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 para 19.