Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Hkbor article 3 (torture and ill‑treatment)

  • 6 Mar 2026

    BAIG MIRZA GHULAM SAMDANI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

    Citation
    [2026] HKCFI 1073
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL908/2021

    Leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the applicant failed to identify or substantiate any arguable public law ground in Form 86 or by affidavit, failed to make full disclosure, and has not shown that the Board's adverse credibility findings or conclusions about lack of risk, state protection and internal relocation involved error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; therefore the intended challenge had no realistic prospects of success.

    • Judicial review (leave stage)
    • Credibility findings
    • Non-refoulement
    • Risk of torture
    • Hkbor article 2 (right to life)
    • Hkbor article 3 (torture and ill-treatment)

  • 14 Nov 2025

    CHU THANH TRUNG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

    Citation
    [2025] HKCFI 5528
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL643/2022

    Leave was dismissed because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and the Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that the risk was localized and internal relocation and state protection were available were open to them on the evidence, and the Applicant confirmed he could safely return, removing any prospect of success.

    • Torture risk
    • Hkbor article 2 (right to life)
    • Hkbor article 3 (torture and ill-treatment)
    • Internal relocation
    • Credibility findings
    • Procedural fairness

  • 22 May 2025

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

    Citation
    [2025] HKCFI 1992
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL315/2020

    The leave application was dismissed because the applicant's grounds were bare, vague and lacking particulars and therefore not reasonably arguable; the Board's adverse credibility finding was supported by oral evidence and reasons and no legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated; the Director and Board reasonably concluded any risk was localized and internal relocation in India was available; the applicant later requested cancellation indicating it was safe to return, so there was no prospect of success.

    • Procedural fairness
    • Judicial review leave
    • Credibility findings
    • Internal relocation
    • Torture risk
    • Hkbor article 2 (right to life)

  • 5 Sept 2024

    NGUYEN THI HA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

    Citation
    [2024] HKCFI 2291
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL2400/2023

    The application for leave fails because the Director and the Board lawfully found the risk from the creditor to be private and low, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and the applicant has not identified any legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in their decisions; therefore there is no reasonably arguable ground for judicial review.

    • Non-refoulement
    • Torture risk
    • Hkbor article 2 (right to life)
    • Hkbor article 3 (torture and ill-treatment)
    • Internal relocation
    • Judicial review standards

  • 21 Sept 2018

    MD KADER v. FRASER SYME, ESQ., AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 2109
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL860/2017

    Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board and Director applied lawful principles, there was no demonstrated error of law or procedural unfairness, the Board reasonably found the risk from private family persecution remote after long passage of time and accepted availability of state protection and internal relocation, and the applicant's grounds were vague and lacked particulars so there was no prospect of success.

    • Non-refoulement
    • Torture
    • Hkbor article 2 (right to life)
    • Hkbor article 3 (torture and ill‑treatment)
    • State protection
    • Internal relocation