Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Domestic violence

Legal area

Court

23 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1228
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL139/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal ground; the Board had made lawful, rational findings after considering evidence and COI, including that the risk was domestic violence without nexus to persecution, that state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available, and there was no procedural unfairness or error of law.
9 Jan 2025

RE DIMALANTA SALOME LUPOS

Citation

[2025] HKCA 56
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV216/2024

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law in the Board's decision and failed to present reasonably arguable grounds for judicial review; the Board was entitled to conclude there was no objective basis for the applicant's fear and the judge correctly refused leave.
4 Sept 2024

KIRAN PREET KAUR alias GURMEET KAUR alias KIRAN-PREET-KAUR alias GURMEET-KAUR alias KAUR GURMEET alias KAUR KIRAN PREET alias KAUR KIRAN PREET KAUR alias GURMEET alias KAUR KIRANPREET v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2324
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1107/2017

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision which had properly applied the relevant legal principles in finding low risk, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation; additionally the applicant confirmed she no longer resisted return to India, removing any prospect of success.
25 Jun 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1664
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL708/2024

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions, which reasonably assessed the low risk of serious harm and availability of internal relocation within Mongolia.
31 May 2024

FONTANILLA VIRGINIA GAO AN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1317
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL806/2019

Extension of time was refused because the applicant had an 11-day unexplained delay and the intended appeal lacked any realistic prospect of success given the Board's findings that the case was routine domestic violence with available state protection and viable internal relocation.
28 May 2024

BANTIGUE SUSAN BANES AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1460
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL588/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicants’ case amounted to disagreement with the Board’s factual findings rather than identifiable errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board properly applied the law, considered evidence and COI, its findings were within its province, and the proposed review had no realistic prospect of success.
23 May 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1411
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL583/2019

Leave refused because the Board correctly applied the law, made credible primary factual findings, and reasonably concluded there was no objective risk given available state protection and feasible internal relocation; no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was established and the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success.
25 Jan 2024

FONTANILLA VIRGINIA GAO AN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 173
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL806/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Board's findings on risk, state protection and internal relocation and therefore had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review; the Board's fact-finding was within its province and not vitiated by law.
7 Jun 2023

BUI THI LE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1493
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL186/2021

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant was more than four months late, provided no satisfactory explanation for the substantial delay and failed to identify any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's and Director's findings that the risk was localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and thus no non-refoulement protection was warranted, were lawful and should not be reviewed; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed.
22 May 2023

CRUZ JENNYLYN MANAYAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1224
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL434/2019

The court refused the extension of time because the applicant was 15 days late, failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on the merits (the Board had found her evidence unacceptable and state protection available), and did not provide a sufficient reason to override the Service record showing the decision was sent to her last known address; accordingly the leave application would be dismissed.