Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Right to life (bora)

Legal area

Court

15 Apr 2026

EVI FARIDA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2103
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1272/2021

The Leave Application is dismissed because it was filed 16 days out of time with no satisfactory explanation and, in any event, the intended judicial review lacks merit: the Board's Decision of 25 May 2021 contains no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and its factual and credibility findings are not open to re-assessment on judicial review.
24 Dec 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5640
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1506/2020

Leave was refused because the Form 86 advanced no reasonably arguable grounds of public law challenge; on anxious scrutiny the TCAB/NRCPO had lawfully and rationally assessed credibility, risk and internal relocation within its primary fact‑finding province; procedural requirements were followed and no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury irrationality was shown such as to justify leave.
10 Sept 2025

SHAH MEHMOOD v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4039
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL675/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant's grounds were generic and unparticularised, the criticisms directed at the Director's decision were not open to review once appeal to TCAB/NRCPO had been pursued, and on rigorous anxious scrutiny there was no reasonably arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the TCAB/NRCPO decision that would justify leave.
2 Sept 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3743
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL868/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable grounds; on anxious scrutiny the TCAB/NRCPO's decision showed no error of law, procedural unfairness, or irrationality as to credibility, state protection, risk assessment and internal relocation, and therefore there was no realistic prospect of success.
15 Jul 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2934
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL644/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable grounds with a realistic prospect of success, the TCAB/NRCPO had lawfully and adequately examined credibility and risk, and the two-tier system precluded direct review of the Director's decision absent exceptional circumstances.

Hong Kong Case Law

EVI FARIDA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

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

SHAH MEHMOOD v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

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

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