Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Torture/article 3 hkbor

Legal area

Court

22 May 2025

HASAN TUHIDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2183
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by detailed reasons and live evidence, and the risk alleged was localized with reasonable internal relocation and available state protection, rendering the claim unsuitable for judicial review.
22 Oct 2024

NURMAISA PARDEDE v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2626
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1297/2024

The Director's refusal of the subsequent claim was lawful because the applicant failed to show any significant change in circumstances or new substantiating material giving the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed and a restricted proceedings order was warranted and made to prevent abuse of process.
27 Aug 2024

QUIATCHON JEFREY MEDIAVILLA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2186
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL867/2020

The court refused to extend time because the applicant was over one month late without any explanation and the intended judicial review had no reasonably arguable grounds: the Director and the Board had addressed the risks, found state protection and internal relocation adequate, and their decisions contained no identifiable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness; therefore leave was refused and the application dismissed.
14 Mar 2024

JAREEN alias JARREEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 770
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL22/2020

Time was extended and leave granted because although the applicant's delay was inordinate, the Board erred in refusing late filing without taking into account the merits of the appeal as a relevant matter under s 37ZT(2)(b); the intended JR was reasonably arguable when assessed against the required threshold and enhanced scrutiny given the potential risk to life/limb, justifying extension of time and grant of leave.
22 Feb 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 387
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL365/2023

Extension of time was refused and the application for leave was dismissed because the applicant delayed over seven months without explanation and had no realistic prospect of success: the Board made adverse credibility findings and correctly concluded that state protection and internal relocation were viable, and there was no demonstrated error of law or procedural unfairness to justify judicial review.
12 Dec 2023

KHAN MOHAMMED ABDULA AL KAIES v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3207
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL882/2021

Leave was refused because the applicant's grounds were vague and unparticularised, failed to identify any legally arguable error, and did not show that the Board's adverse credibility findings, reliance on COI, assessment of state risk and availability of internal relocation were irrational or procedurally unfair; additionally the applicant confirmed he no longer opposed return to Bangladesh.
30 Nov 2023

FEBRI FEBRIANA PRASETYA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3092
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL475/2021

The court refused to extend time because the applicant's delay of over three and a half months was substantial and she gave no good reason; moreover the intended judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success because the Board and Director's findings that the risks were localized, private disputes, and that state protection and internal relocation were available did not involve legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness; accordingly leave was refused and the leave application dismissed.
20 Nov 2023

MOHAMED NAWSHAD MOHAMED NAZIR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3011
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL409/2020

Extension of time was refused because the applicant's 3½ month delay was substantial and inordinate, the explanations were unsupported and inadequate, and the intended judicial review disclosed no reasonably arguable grounds given the Board's fact-based adverse credibility findings and the absence of identifiable legal error or procedural unfairness; accordingly leave was dismissed.
15 Aug 2023

HAIDER MUHAMMAD USMAN alias MALIK MUHAMMAD OSMAN HAYADAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2043
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1124/2019

Leave was refused because the applicant did not demonstrate any realistic prospect of success: the Board's credibility findings and conclusions that the risk on refoulement was low, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were within its fact-finding remit and were not shown to involve error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness.
15 Aug 2023

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

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2042
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1123/2019

Leave was refused because the court found no error of law or procedural unfairness in the Board's Decision, the Board's credibility and risk assessments were not Wednesbury unreasonable or irrational, and the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.