Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Prospects of appeal

Legal area

Court

29 Apr 2026

ANWAR TARIQ v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2329
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1400/2020

The application for an extension of time was refused because the short delay was insufficiently explained, and the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success given the court's prior conclusion that there were no arguable public law grounds to vitiate the Director's or TCAB's decisions; granting an extension would be futile and prejudicial to respondents.
27 Apr 2026

NAWAZ MUHAMMAD v. NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2206
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1341/2020

The application for an extension of time was refused because the applicant was over three months late, provided no reasonable explanation or evidence for delayed receipt of properly served court documents, and the intended appeal had no real prospect of success under the enhanced Wednesbury standard; granting an extension would be futile and prejudicial to the respondent.
27 Apr 2026

MEHMOOD FAISAL v. NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2205
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1308/2020

The application for extension of time was refused because it was over four months late, the applicant's unrepresented status and ignorance of time limits did not justify the substantial delay, the intended appeal disclosed no reasonably arguable public law ground after rigorous review under the enhanced Wednesbury standard, and granting an extension would be futile and prejudicial to the respondent.
9 Feb 2026

RE GAO, GUNTER

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1548
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCB4502/2025

Because the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success and the impugned decision established a significant debt properly founding the petition, the court made the normal bankruptcy order and refused a stay.
13 Nov 2025

CONTEH ESSA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5213
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1261/2020

The application for an extension of time is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any proposed grounds of appeal and did not attend hearings; even assuming a reasonable explanation for the short (10‑day) delay, there is no prospect of success of the intended appeal and the applicant's want of prosecution justified dismissal.
11 Jul 2024

IDA NENGSIH AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1757
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL414/2022

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay (over ten weeks) was substantial, the applicants failed to provide any credible explanation or evidence for non-receipt of the decision, the decision had been sent to their last reported address and not returned, the applicants failed to attend the summons hearing, and they failed to file draft grounds or identify errors demonstrating no prospect of success, rendering an extension futile.
14 Jul 2023

RE UMAYAH SAINO

Citation

[2023] HKCA 868
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP428/2022

Extension of time was refused because the delay was substantial and unexplained, the decision had been mailed to the applicant's last known address, and the intended appeal had no prospect of success such that granting an extension would be futile.
17 Apr 2023

RE NZEWI JUDE UGOCHUKWU

Citation

[2023] HKCA 533
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP218/2022

Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant's delay was substantial and inadequately explained and, critically, the intended appeal lacked any prospect of success so granting an extension would be futile.
14 Sept 2022

RE GILL JAGRAJ SINGH

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2733
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL251/2018

The applicant's almost two-year delay was inordinate and unexplained by admissible evidence; he failed to proffer any proposed grounds or identify any arguable error in the refusal of leave so there was no prospect of success; accordingly extension of time to appeal was refused and the summons dismissed.
2 Aug 2022

RE PHUNG THI MAI

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2277
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1629/2021

Refusal to extend time because the applicant's five-week delay was substantial, she failed to provide satisfactory evidence or a good reason for non-receipt of the decision, she failed to advance any arguable grounds or identify error of law or procedural unfairness, and therefore there was no reasonable prospect of success making an extension futile.