Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Risk assessment and credibility

Legal area

Court

4 Feb 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 679
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL887/2023

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to particularize any legally arguable errors; the Board's and Director's decisions showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, the risk was assessed as low with viable internal relocation and available state protection, and there was no realistic prospect of success (also reinforced by the applicant's subsequent withdrawal request).
3 Oct 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2443
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL955/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any legal error, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury‑level irrationality in the Board's findings on credibility, delay, state protection and internal relocation and therefore had no realistic prospect of success.
15 Jan 2020

ALCAIDE CAROLINE VILAGA v. BRUCE HENRY, ADJUDICATOR OF THE NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 78
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1209/2018

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board lawfully reached adverse credibility findings after oral hearing and reasonably assessed the risk as low and internal relocation as available, and judicial review is not an avenue to re‑assess those primary factual evaluations.
25 Jun 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1307
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL587/2017

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the adjudicator's adverse credibility findings and application of law were reasonable and lawful, he did not err in law or act unfairly in a way that undermines the decision, the new evidence would not have altered findings, and the application had no realistic prospect of success.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

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

ALCAIDE CAROLINE VILAGA v. BRUCE HENRY, ADJUDICATOR OF THE NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

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