Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Time bar and extension of time

Legal area

Court

19 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1217
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL62/2022

The leave application is dismissed because it was filed out of time without any application for extension or explanation and because the proposed grounds do not disclose a reasonably arguable case with a realistic prospect of success; the Board's decision showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.
10 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4642
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1760/2020

The application is dismissed because it was plainly out of time with no extension sought and, on the merits, the TCAB decision showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and correctly found the grounds not made out and internal relocation available, such that there was no reasonably arguable claim with a realistic prospect of success.
9 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4640
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2288/2020

Application dismissed because it was plainly out of time with no extension sought and, on the merits, the TCAB applied correct principles, adequately considered the evidence and made reasons that did not disclose any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; therefore no realistic prospect of success for judicial review.
12 Feb 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 658
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2092/2024

Leave refused because the application was filed out of time without satisfactory explanation for a substantial delay (over two years), the Applicant failed to plead any reasonably arguable grounds of legal error or procedural unfairness in the Board’s decision, the Board’s credibility and risk findings were lawful and not irrational, and the proffered fresh evidence was irrelevant to the core claim and would not affect the outcome.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

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

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

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