Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Service and proceeding in absence

Legal area

Court

14 May 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2656
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1486/2022

The leave application was dismissed because it was filed out of time, the Applicant failed to provide any grounds demonstrating errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision, the challenge was not reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success, and Form 86 should be amended to name the Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party; even if extension had been sought, it would have been refused given the absence of arguable grounds.
8 May 2026

ZHANG XIANGHUI v. AMAX AND ASSOCIATES LTD

Citation

[2026] HKDC 748
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ5624/2023

The defendant was liable for defamation for publishing the Statements; the Statements bore the natural and ordinary meanings set out by the court; on quantum general damages of HK$200,000 were appropriate having regard to limited circulation and lack of aggravating evidence; aggravated damages were refused for lack of evidence of increased injury and absence of plaintiff testimony; an injunction was granted; costs and pre-judgment interest were awarded to the plaintiff.
29 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2346
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1419/2021

The leave application is dismissed because the Applicant failed to particularise any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board had considered the claims afresh and provided adequate reasons satisfying the enhanced Wednesbury test in non-refoulement cases; consequently the intended challenge was not reasonably arguable and lacked realistic prospects of success; Form 86 is amended to name the Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party.
7 Jun 2017

張對謝

Citation

張對謝
Court

Family Court
Case number

FCMC256/2000

Court inferred respondent's monthly income at not less than HK$26,000 from bank deposits and industry rates, rejected respondent's asserted monthly expenses as exaggerated and lacking evidence (reasonably assessed at HK$22,000), leaving a monthly surplus of HK$4,000 which the respondent is ordered to pay to the applicant as maintenance; proper service was effected and hearing proceeded in respondent's absence.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

ZHANG XIANGHUI v. AMAX AND ASSOCIATES LTD

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

張 對 謝

張對謝