Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Late filing of notice of appeal

Legal area

Court

13 May 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2687
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1348/2021

Leave was granted because the Board failed to consider the merits of the applicant's claim as required by binding Court of Appeal authority, and the subsequent amendment to s37TZ (effective 1 August 2021) could not be relied upon retrospectively to justify the Board's earlier decision.
6 May 2026

SREETHONGBAI CHOTINAPHA alias SREETONGBAI CHOTINARPAR alias SREETONGBAI CHOTINAPAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2501
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1567/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the Board's decision of 24 April 2019 did not consider the merits of the applicant's claim contrary to established Court of Appeal authority; the subsequent statutory revision (s37TZ) removing that obligation could not be applied retrospectively to validate the Board's conduct.
20 Apr 2026

RE SANDHU VINNY

Citation

[2026] HKCA 715
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP501/2022

The Notice of Motion was dismissed because the applicant filed it out of time without adequate explanation for the inordinate delay and failed to identify any question of great general or public importance or any particularized, reasonably arguable error of law as required under section 22(1)(b) Cap 484; therefore leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was refused.
24 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1467
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL176/2022

The court held that the applicant's leave application was reasonably arguable because the Board's decision did not make apparent that it had properly assessed the merits of the non-refoulement claim when refusing late filing; because the threshold for leave was met and merits weighed in favour of granting an extension of time, the court exercised its discretion to allow the applicant to file the leave application out of time and granted leave to apply for judicial review subject to directions to commence proceedings within 14 days.
13 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1195
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL519/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review and an extension of time were granted because the TCAB made a fundamental legal error by failing to consider the merits when refusing the late filing of the notice of appeal, and the applicant demonstrated a realistic prospect of success making extension appropriate despite gross delay.
4 Feb 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 424
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1241/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the Board's 19 July 2019 decision failed to consider the merits of the applicant's case as required by appellate authority at the time of the decision, and the subsequent amendment to s.37TZ (effective 1 August 2021) does not operate retrospectively to validate that omission.
2 Dec 2025

KISAAKYE JESSIE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5858
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1242/2021

The court refused the applicant's attempt to withdraw the leave application and dismissed the leave application because the applicant confirmed she no longer sought non-refoulement protection and the intended judicial review no longer served any practical purpose, rendering any remedy otiose; authorities require dismissal rather than leaving the action at large.
31 Oct 2025

RE MOHAMMED ASLAM

Citation

[2025] HKCA 914
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV192/2025

The Court held that the Board did not adequately consider the merits of the applicant's out-of-time appeals despite asserting it had; consistent with Qasim Ali and s37ZT(2)(b) the Board was required to take account of merits (on paper) when assessing late filing, and consequently the appeal is allowed and leave to apply for judicial review is granted.
6 Aug 2025

SARFARAZ HUSSAIN v. NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3329
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1054/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted out of time because it was reasonably arguable with realistic prospects that the Board had erred by failing to consider the substantive merits of the applicant's proposed appeal as required by s.37ZT(2) of the Immigration Ordinance; balancing the criteria for extension (length/reason for delay, merits and prejudice) the court exercised its discretion to extend time and permit the application to proceed.
11 Jul 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2070
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL234/2020

The court dismissed the application for leave to apply for judicial review because the applicant expressly elected to withdraw the application, and the court acted in accordance with the established authority that permits dismissal on withdrawal (Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 §19); the court also amended Form 86 to name the Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party.