Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admissibility of fresh evidence

Legal area

Court

27 Apr 2026

AHMMAD MD MUNSUR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 949
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1377/2021

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to present any reasonably arguable grounds or to properly explain or seek to adduce the attached documents, and the Board's Decision disclosed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and satisfied the enhanced Wednesbury standard.
10 Apr 2026

RE MAHMOOD TARIQ

Citation

[2026] HKCA 617
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV61/2026

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant raised new, fact‑sensitive grounds and late evidence for the first time on appeal without explanation, failed to use the statutory appeal route to the Torture Claims Appeal Board under s37ZR(a), and did not present viable grounds to overturn the judge's refusal; claims of lack of language or legal assistance were unsupported and the late evidence did not meet Ladd v Marshall criteria.
2 Apr 2026

SINGH NARINDER PAL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 596
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV100/2026

Appeal dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable ground to overturn the judge's refusal of leave; the issues raised on appeal were fact-sensitive matters not raised before the judge so cannot be first invoked on appeal; no application was made to admit new evidence and the material tendered would not have assisted; absent error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality the Court will not substitute its own assessment for the Board's factual determinations.
1 Apr 2026

SHAH SYED MUJAHID HUSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1945
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL734/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to articulate any legal grounds for review or rely on evidence that had been considered by the Board; the Board's decision showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and therefore the claim lacked realistic prospects of success.
30 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1809
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL386/2026

The leave application was refused because the delay in filing was grossly inordinate and the applicant's explanations (belief he could obtain a Hong Kong identity card, lack of funds, late legal aid application) were not genuine or reasonable; given the excessive delay and lack of credible explanation or particularised fresh evidence, extension of time was not justified and leave was refused.
24 Mar 2026

RE KHAN MAJID

Citation

[2026] HKCA 437
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV1185/2025

The appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any specific error in the Leave Decision with sufficient particulars; general and vague assertions are insufficient to overturn a refusal of leave to apply for judicial review, and the subsequent New Documents submitted without leave are inadmissible and irrelevant to the leave application.
17 Mar 2026

FRAZ DIL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Citation

[2026] HKCA 320
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV1235/2025

The appeal is dismissed because the Applicant failed to advance any viable grounds showing error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the decisions of the Director or the Board or in the judge's refusal of leave; the Director and Board provided adequate reasons; the new Urdu document would not materially alter the outcome in light of the Board's finding that internal relocation in Pakistan was viable; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review is refused and the appeal has no merit.
12 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1227
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1202/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's factual credibility findings were entitled to deference; the newly produced Bangladesh judgment and other documents were late, not placed before the Board, inadequately explained, and could not, even if credited, demonstrate the requisite error or advance the applicant's case to a degree warranting leave.
11 Mar 2026

AZIZ AAMIR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1451
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL387/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify a reasonably arguable ground; the Board conducted a fair assessment, its factual findings and risk assessment were within its remit and not vitiated by error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the applicant cannot rely on fresh evidence not placed before the Board to found judicial review.
23 Feb 2026

XUE BORAN AND ANOTHER v. HUI CHI SUM AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2026] HKCA 247
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV70/2024

The Court dismissed the appeals because the trial judge's factual findings that a HK$20,000,000 loan existed and that the Loan Note and Loan Agreement were enforceable were supported by contemporaneous payments and messages, the defendants failed to establish duress or undue influence, the defendants had abandoned the lack-of-consideration defence at trial and, in any event, valid consideration (forbearance to sue) existed, and new evidence or new points not raised below were barred by Flywin.