Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Torture and persecution claims

Legal area

Court

3 Jul 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2028
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL181/2020

Leave was refused because the Director's decisions were not amenable to judicial review after appeal to the Board, the Applicant failed to show any arguable public law error or real prospect of success, and he suffered no prejudice from the alleged lack of language assistance or legal representation; the Board's credibility and risk assessments were open to it and were not vitiated by procedural unfairness.
12 Apr 2023

DANG VAN TUAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2023] HKCA 517
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP465/2022

Applicant's renewed application for extension of time was dismissed because the applicant offered no explanation for a substantial and inexcusable delay and, given the lack of any realistic prospect of success on the merits (no error of law or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision and lack of merit in the representation complaint), no extension should be granted.
8 Mar 2023

RE SARDER ABDUL MAZID

Citation

[2023] HKCA 260
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV254/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify or particularise any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; credibility and risk assessments were within the Board's fact-finding province and the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.
13 Dec 2022

JUM ALIE v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1807
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP251/2022

The Court refused to extend time because the applicant's delay was inexcusable (he failed to provide an effective address and did not file grounds or submissions) and he failed to demonstrate any real prospect of success in the intended appeal; accordingly the discretionary relief of an extension was declined.
5 Jul 2022

MOHAMMAD FIROJ AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2033
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1754/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicants failed to show a significant change of circumstances or any realistic prospect of success; the Director's factual findings were not Wednesbury unreasonable or procedurally unfair, and an RPO was warranted to prevent abuse of process given repeated re-litigation of substantially the same facts.
27 Jul 2021

NUR FEBRI PRIHATINI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 2187
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL221/2021

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant provided no adequate explanation for a substantial ~20-month delay, deliberately absented herself from a hearing and failed to notify the change of address as required by s.37ZA(2), the adjudicator reasonably determined the appeal on paper, and there was no realistic prospect of success on the non-refoulement grounds.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

DANG VAN TUAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RE SARDER ABDUL MAZID

JUM ALIE v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

MOHAMMAD FIROJ AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

NUR FEBRI PRIHATINI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]