Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Risk of torture (article 3 hkbor)

Legal area

Court

12 Feb 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 931
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL754/2021

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supportable on the evidence, and even if some risk existed it was localized and internal relocation in India was a reasonable alternative, so there was no prospect of success on judicial review.
22 May 2025

TURAN MOHAMMAD NAZRUL ISLAM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2180
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL4/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings, and its conclusions that state protection and internal relocation were available, were rational and lawful, leaving no prospect of success.
25 Mar 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 794
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1275/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on low risk, availability of state protection and internal relocation were within its fact-finding discretion and disclosed no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.
17 Oct 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2521
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL984/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on past ill-treatment, availability of state protection and internal relocation were supported by evidence and did not disclose any error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness.
8 Sept 2022

BUI THANH MINH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2759
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL599/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the decisions of the Director and the Board; the Board's adverse credibility findings were upheld as rational and supported by detailed reasons, and even if the applicant's account were accepted the risk was localized with state protection and reasonable internal relocation available, so no non-refoulement protection arose.
17 Aug 2018

SUBHASH KUMAR v. MS WONG HING-CHUN, ESQ., TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1609
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1079/2017

Leave was refused because the applicant's grounds were broad, vague and unsupported by particulars or evidence, the Director and Board's findings that the risk was low and that state protection/internal relocation were available were rational and there was no procedural unfairness shown; accordingly there was no arguable prospect of success on judicial review.
20 Jul 2018

HARIATI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1693
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL901/2017

Leave was refused because the applicant presented a significant unexplained delay of approximately four months without good reason and her grounds for judicial review were speculative, vague or constituted new claims without prior evidential basis; the Director's and Board's decisions disclosed no error of law or procedural unfairness and there was no realistic prospect of success.
8 Jun 2018

ALI SAQIB v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1250
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL244/2017

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because, on rigorous examination and anxious scrutiny, there was no arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions rejecting the non-refoulement claim and therefore no prospect of success.