Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Torture/ill‑treatment

Legal area

Court

12 May 2026

MOKTAN TAMANG TINA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 947
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV159/2026

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable public law error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's findings (no real risk of severe ill‑treatment, availability of state protection and viable internal relocation); therefore the High Court judge correctly refused leave and the appeal is dismissed.
30 Apr 2026

NGUYEN VAN BINH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2396
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL316/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify reasonably arguable public law grounds; the Board's adverse credibility and factual findings were open to it, there was no demonstrable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the court will not reweigh primary fact-finding of the Board.
27 Mar 2026

BUI THI LY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 996
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL34/2022

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any valid public law ground; the Board's factual and COI assessments were within its province and there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality. The Board permissibly concluded the dispute was private, there was no intent to harm amounting to torture or serious ill-treatment, and internal relocation was available; therefore the intended judicial review was not reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success.
24 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4903
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL999/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify arguable grounds or make full and frank disclosure in Form 86, and the Board's detailed factual findings (lack of credibility, insufficient severity of past ill-treatment, and availability of state protection/internal relocation) were not shown to involve any public law error, procedural unfairness or irrationality such as would justify interference on judicial review.
21 Feb 2025

RE NANA RIYANI

Citation

[2025] HKCA 131
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV163/2024

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant identified no legal error or procedural unfairness in the Judge’s decision or the Board’s factfinding; the Board’s conclusion that the uncle was unlikely to harm the applicant and that state protection was available was rational and the leave application had no realistic prospect of success.
4 Jun 2019

RE RASHPAUL CHAND

Citation

[2019] HKCA 639
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV59/2019

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law or exceptional circumstances to justify judicial review of the Director's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation deprived the proposed challenge of any reasonable prospect of success.

Hong Kong Case Law

MOKTAN TAMANG TINA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

NGUYEN VAN BINH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

BUI THI LY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

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

RE NANA RIYANI

RE RASHPAUL CHAND