Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Risk to life (hkbor article 2)

Legal area

Court

20 May 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2847
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1643/2021

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable or realistic prospect of success on judicial review; the Board's adverse credibility and risk findings and its conclusion that internal relocation was viable were within its fact-finding province and no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was shown.
30 Dec 2025

MD WAHID v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6378
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2350/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant relied on the same grounds as his finally determined previous claim and failed to demonstrate any significant change of circumstances under section 37ZO giving a realistic prospect of success; because the applicant was likely to abuse process, a Restricted Proceedings Order was necessary and proportionate to prevent further abusive litigation.
19 Nov 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5336
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1112/2025

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Board's Decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that state protection and internal relocation were available were not irrational or unlawful, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.
24 Jun 2025

PRAYITNO MUHAMAD AGUS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2591
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1768/2024

Extension of time was refused because the applicant was more than nine months late, offered no explanation for the substantial delay, and the intended challenge lacked any identified legal error or prospect of success; the Board's and Director's decisions with respect to credibility, low risk, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation withstand rigorous scrutiny, so leave was refused and the application dismissed.
31 Oct 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2632
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1217/2019

The applicant lacked a realistic prospect of success because the Board’s adverse credibility findings and conclusions that past ill-treatment was low intensity, that there was no state involvement, and that state protection and internal relocation were available were not vitiated by error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, so leave to apply for judicial review was properly refused.
2 Aug 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1902
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1008/2019

Leave was refused because the Board's factual findings were within its fact-finding province, no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was shown, state protection and internal relocation were found available, and the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.
31 Jul 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1760
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1735/2018

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable or reasonable prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on risk, state protection and internal relocation were supported by reasons and there was no shown error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality warranting judicial review.
30 Jun 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1369
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1793/2018

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or unfairness in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and risk assessments were not shown to be irrational or legally flawed, so there was no reasonable prospect of success on judicial review.
18 Jun 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1221
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1757/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant failed to show any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; credibility findings by the Board that the claim was fabricated or unreliable were matters of fact within the Board's remit and the applicant lacked a reasonable prospect of success.