Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Torture (article 3 bor)

Legal area

Court

28 Jan 2026

TAILOR SIRAJ NIZAMUDDIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 85
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1290/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable grounds; the TCAB/NRCPO's findings on credibility, risk, state protection and internal relocation were within its province and supported by evidence; there was no demonstrable procedural unfairness, error of law or irrationality sufficient to vitiate the decision, so the leave application had no realistic prospect of success.
2 Jan 2025

RE SAMPAYAN BERNARD ABLAO

Citation

[2025] HKCA 31
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV252/2024

The applicant failed to identify any public law error by the Board or the Judge and did not show a realistic prospect of success for judicial review; therefore leave was properly refused and the appeal from refusal of leave is dismissed, although an extension of time to lodge the sealed order was granted.
27 Sept 2024

DINH THUY TRANG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2636
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL975/2023

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant's grounds were bare assertions without particulars or supporting evidence, the Director and Board lawfully and reasonably concluded there was no real risk, state protection and internal relocation were viable, and there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's fact-finding which falls within its exclusive province; the proposed judicial review was not reasonably arguable.
9 Sept 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 2388
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1692/2023

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant failed to advance any reasonably arguable grounds or particulars demonstrating error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings, assessment of risk, state protection and internal relocation were supported by the record and within the Board's province, so there were no realistic prospects of success to justify leave.
17 Apr 2023

RE MUHAMMAD TARIQ TAHIR

Citation

[2023] HKCA 528
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV295/2022

The Judge correctly refused leave because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal ground, refused to cooperate with the Board resulting in adverse credibility findings and no real prospect of success, and there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality warranting judicial review; the Court will not re‑try the factual merits of the Board's decision.
17 Oct 2022

RE ZULFIQAR ALI

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1536
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP153/2022

The extension of time was refused because the intended appeal was unarguable: the Judge had rigorously reviewed the Boards decision and found no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, so granting an extension would be futile despite the delay.
11 May 2022

RE MANJIT SINGH AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCA 649
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV388/2021

The appeal is dismissed because the applicants failed to establish any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's or Judge's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility and risk assessments were rational and supported the conclusion there was no real risk of harm to the family or the children, and the non-representation of the minors was a mere irregularity given the fairness of the proceedings.
6 Apr 2022

MEHMOOD SAJID v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 988
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL382/2019

Leave 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 made a detailed adverse credibility finding after oral evidence and the Director and Board correctly applied legal principles including consideration of state protection and internal relocation, so there is no prospect of success for judicial review.
10 Feb 2022

RE MOHOMED RASEEN MOHOMED FAIZAL

Citation

[2022] HKCA 210
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV280/2021

The appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable ground showing an error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; credibility and evidential assessments are matters for the Board and the Judge correctly refused leave to apply for judicial review.
10 Feb 2022

RE MANSANO KATLEEN CASMERE PASTRANA AND OTHERS

Citation

[2022] HKCA 214
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV185/2021

The appeal was dismissed because the Board had found the 1st applicant's primary factual assertions to be incredible, leaving no reasonably arguable basis for judicial review; the judge therefore did not err in law or commit procedural irregularity in refusing leave.