Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sexual orientation persecution

Legal area

Court

2 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1930
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2238/2023

Applicant's grounds were bare, vague and lacked necessary particulars; Board and Director lawfully assessed evidence and COI, accepted sexual orientation but found no real risk of Proscribed Harms and that state protection/internal relocation were available; no legal error or procedural unfairness identified; accordingly no reasonably arguable case for leave and the leave application was dismissed.
23 Dec 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6271
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL194/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the applicant raised reasonably arguable grounds that the Board's decision was tainted by procedural unfairness and legal error: the Board allegedly failed to put adverse findings to the applicant, made conclusions not grounded in evidence (including assuming the applicant would not engage in future lesbian activity), and failed adequately to consider COI and state protection/internal relocation, such that the decision met the arguable error threshold for leave.
17 Jun 2025

WANGSIH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1917
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL5/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify arguable public law errors in the Board's decision; the Board's principal factual findings — no reliable evidence of conversion, availability of state protection, viability of internal relocation, and absence of a substantial risk of ill-treatment — were open to the Board on the evidence and did not disclose a basis for supervisory relief.
12 Aug 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1915
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL517/2018

Extension of time refused because applicant offered no satisfactory explanation for the two-week delay and his intended grounds were not reasonably arguable; the Board's adverse credibility finding and assessment of low risk and availability of internal relocation involved no legal error or procedural unfairness susceptible to judicial review, so leave was refused and the application dismissed.
11 Oct 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2295
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL167/2017

The court granted leave to apply for judicial review because there are reasonably arguable grounds that the Director and the TCAB erred in law in their assessment of the Applicant's risk of persecution and the country conditions in Gambia, warranting examination at a full hearing; consequential case management directions and an anonymity order were appropriate.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

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

WANGSIH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

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

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