Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial review - leave threshold

Legal area

Court

29 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2192
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1678/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success: the Board's factual findings (that the applicant's motive was to remain in Hong Kong for employment and that state protection in Indonesia was available) were within the Board's fact-finding province and there was no arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality to justify judicial review.
11 Mar 2026

IDREES SOHAIL AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1351
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2186/2025

Leave refused because the applicants failed to show a realistic prospect of success: the Board's findings that the claims were unsubstantiated, that state protection and internal relocation were available, and that there was no real risk on return were rational and supported by the evidence, and the applicants offered only bare assertions without supporting particulars or evidence.
3 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1000
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1319/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant raised no arguable ground: the Board's findings that state protection was available, that alleged harms were speculative, and that internal relocation was viable were not shown to be legally irrational or procedurally unfair, so the applicant has no realistic prospect of success.
5 Sept 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4044
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL545/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success or any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's determinations that the claim was unsubstantiated and that state protection and internal relocation were available were within its factual province and not amenable to supervisory intervention.
16 Jan 2020

KANDIARA GURSEWAK SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 133
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1334/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable legal error or procedural unfairness: the Director and the Board lawfully applied COI, concluded the risk was localized and internal relocation was reasonable, the applicant had assistance at relevant stages, and the complaints about representation and translation were speculative and not reasonably arguable.
4 May 2018

MONJUR HOSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 935
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL247/2017

Leave was refused because, on rigorous examination, there was no arguable ground for judicial review: the Director and the Board applied the correct legal tests, the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by the evidence and fatal to the claim, and the factual findings that state protection and internal relocation were available meant there was no real prospect of success on non-refoulement or torture grounds.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

IDREES SOHAIL AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

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

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

KANDIARA GURSEWAK SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

MONJUR HOSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]