6 May 2026
The court refused the applicant's request to withdraw and dismissed the leave application because the factual basis for non-refoulement relief (the alleged risk arising from an unpaid debt) had ceased to exist, rendering any grant of leave or remedial order otiose even if there were errors in the Board's decision.
9 Dec 2025
The court refused the applicant's withdrawal request and dismissed the leave application because the applicant confirmed it was safe to return to Vietnam, rendering the non-refoulement claim and any judicial review remedy otiose; therefore there was no practical purpose in granting leave even if legal errors might exist.
9 Dec 2025
The court refused the applicant’s request to withdraw the leave application and dismissed the leave application on the basis that the applicant’s non-refoulement claim had become otiose; because the risk underpinning the claim no longer existed there was no practical purpose in granting leave even if legal errors were alleged, and the action should be dismissed rather than left at large.
9 Dec 2025
The leave application was dismissed because the applicant expressly withdrew and confirmed it was safe to return, the Director confirmed the applicant's removal, and accordingly any judicial review remedy would be otiose; the court therefore refused the withdrawal application as a procedural matter and dismissed the leave application while amending the named parties.
11 Nov 2025
The leave application was dismissed because it was filed out of time without satisfactory reason for delay and, on full scrutiny, disclosed no arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; moreover any remedy would be otiose as the applicant confirmed it was safe to return.
30 Sept 2025
The Board's decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality on anxious scrutiny; the applicant's withdrawal was refused but the leave application was dismissed because the claim lacks realistic prospects of success and has become otiose given the applicant's confirmation she is safe in her home country.
30 Sept 2025
The leave application is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable grounds, the Board's Decision withstands anxious scrutiny and contains no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the application is otiose given the applicant's confirmation that his issues in his home country have been resolved; the applicant's request to withdraw was refused and the court amended the putative parties' names on its own motion.
5 Jul 2022
Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant withdrew the application and there was no practical purpose in granting relief; the remedy would be otiose under established authorities.
8 Mar 2022
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed because the applicant withdrew and the court exercised its discretion to refuse relief that would serve no practical purpose (otiose), following authority that remedies may be refused where the relevant detriment has been removed.
25 Jan 2022
Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant sought to cancel the application and, applying established authority that the court may refuse relief that would be otiose, granting leave would serve no practical purpose.