Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Subsequent claims under section 37zo

Legal area

Court

10 Jun 2025

MASANTHIAH TEERAPONG v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1923
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL742/2025

The applicant failed to demonstrate the significant change of circumstances or any new substantiated evidence that, when combined with prior material, would give his subsequent non-refoulement claim a realistic prospect of success under section 37ZO; the Director's decision was not shown to be unlawful or unreasonable; leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed; an RPO was warranted to prevent further abusive, duplicative proceedings.
26 Jul 2023

NGUYEN VAN DIU alias NGUYEN XUAN DIU v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1920
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL851/2023

The Director lawfully refused permission for a subsequent claim because the applicant failed to present sufficient new evidence showing a significant change of circumstances under s37ZO; prior final determinations on credibility, state protection and internal relocation negated the claimed risk; no arguable point of law or procedural unfairness was shown and there was no realistic prospect of success; given repeated attempts to re-litigate finally determined non-refoulement issues the court properly made a five‑year Restricted Proceedings Order under s27 High Court Ordinance and the court's i…
12 Apr 2023

ISLAM MAHIDUL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 549
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1196/2022

The Director lawfully refused permission for a subsequent claim because the applicant failed to provide sufficient written evidence of a significant change of circumstances or a realistic prospect of success, and the unchallenged prior findings of low risk, availability of state protection and internal relocation remained determinative; given the applicant's persistent attempts to relitigate the same matter, a Restricted Proceedings Order was justified to prevent abuse of process and to protect court resources.
9 Mar 2023

HOSSAIN AFZAL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 650
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1362/2022

The court refused leave because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances under s37ZO: the subsequent claim relied on the same unsubstantiated facts already dismissed by the Board and courts and presented no realistic prospect of success; given the procedural history and likelihood of repetitive litigation, an RPO was necessary to prevent abuse of process.

Hong Kong Case Law

MASANTHIAH TEERAPONG v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

NGUYEN VAN DIU alias NGUYEN XUAN DIU v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

ISLAM MAHIDUL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

HOSSAIN AFZAL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]