Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Travel documents

Legal area

Court

12 Nov 2025

KHOIRUL NURKHASANAH v. HONG KONG SAR GOVERNMENT

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 5477
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2173/2025

Detention was lawful and continued detention was reasonable: the Director had a valid removal order, acted with reasonable diligence in seeking and obtaining a travel document and arranging a removal flight, and the applicant's persistent refusal to cooperate with travel document formalities meant the extended detention was caused by her conduct and did not render an otherwise lawful detention unlawful; additionally there was a real risk of absconding given her history.
17 Sept 2025

BAL TAMANG CHANDRA BAHADUR v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4375
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1802/2025

Detention was lawful because the RO and DO were valid, the Director and Secretary acted with reasonable diligence to effect removal, the prolonged duration was directly caused by the Applicant's repeated refusal to cooperate with re-entry formalities and by his history of absconding and offending which created a real risk of absconding/re-offending; accordingly HS1–HS4 were satisfied and the habeas corpus application was dismissed.
19 Aug 2025

GURDEEP SINGH v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3712
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1357/2025

Detention was lawful and reasonable: a valid deportation order existed, the Secretary/Director intend and have acted with reasonable diligence to effect removal, the applicant's persistent refusal to cooperate in obtaining travel documents and his serious criminal history with demonstrated absconding risk mean the period of detention (88 days) is not unreasonable under the Hardial Singh principles and s.32(4A) IO, therefore habeas corpus relief is refused.
23 Jan 2024

WASEEM QAISAR v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 272
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2144/2023

The Director discharged the burden to justify continued detention: the removal order remained valid, the Director acted with reasonable diligence to obtain a replacement travel document, and the bulk of the 899‑day detention was attributable to the applicant's deliberate non‑cooperation; accordingly the detention remained lawful and the habeas corpus application was dismissed.
4 Dec 2023

WAHEED RAZA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3136
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1880/2023

Detention was lawful because it was plainly for the sole purpose of removal, the Director acted with diligence to obtain a travel document and to expedite the pending judicial review, the Applicant's uncooperative conduct caused self-induced delay, and the Applicant posed real risks of absconding and reoffending such that an 80-day detention and likely foreseeable continuation remained reasonable.
25 Oct 2023

EJAZ ADNAN v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2751
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1624/2023

Detention remained lawful because a valid removal order was in force, the Director acted with reasonable diligence to secure travel documentation, the applicant's refusal to co-operate substantially contributed to the delay, and on balance the Hardial Singh factors showed the period of detention was reasonable; therefore habeas corpus relief was refused.
11 Aug 2023

RASHID ZAFAR GHORI v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2091
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1294/2023

Counting detention from 5 August 2021, the court found the period, though lengthy (about 24 months), did not render detention unlawful because the Director acted diligently to secure travel documents and effect removal, the applicant repeatedly created delays and frustrated deportation attempts, and there is a real risk of absconding and re-offending; therefore habeas corpus relief was refused.
20 Jun 2023

JOOF, SAIHOU v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1621
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL878/2023

Detention was lawful: the Director had clear statutory authority and an intention to remove; the Director acted with reasonable diligence in pursuing travel documentation and court priority; the applicant had created or contributed to the practical impediment by refusing or failing to cooperate to obtain a replacement travel document; there was a real risk of reoffending and absconding; weighing those factors against a 7‑month detention the court was satisfied continued detention was reasonable and lawful, so habeas corpus relief was refused.
8 Jun 2023

MUSHTAQ IMRAN ALI v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1553
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL738/2023

Detention was lawful and reasonable: statutory authority existed under s32(3); removal was imminent with repatriation flight and emergency travel document; delays were substantially caused by the applicant's own conduct (late judicial review application and lack of cooperation on travel documents); applicant posed a real flight risk; balancing Hardial Singh factors, continued detention until removal was proportionate and lawful.
22 Dec 2022

LAKHVIR SINGH v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 3776
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1282/2022

Detention of the applicant for 91 days was lawful because the Deportation Order was valid, there were no outstanding legal impediments to removal, the Secretary/Director were actively pursuing issuance of a replacement travel document with the Indian Consulate, and the applicant's inconsistent cooperation increased the risk of absconding; on balance the detention was reasonable under the Hardial Singh criteria.