Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Arguability test

Legal area

Court

13 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1196
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL605/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the court found a realistic prospect of success that the TCAB committed a fundamental error of law by failing adequately to consider the merits when refusing the late filing of the NOA; the judge exercised discretion to extend time notwithstanding absence of a good explanation for the delay because the alleged error was fundamental.
9 Apr 2021

RE NASEER MUHAMMAD

Citation

[2021] HKCA 491
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV493/2020

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to establish good reason for extending time and failed the arguability test: the Deputy Judge correctly held the application was out of time, the applicant offered no explanation for delay, did not identify any error in the Deputy Judge's exercise of discretion, and the grounds submitted were directed to the Board/Director and either lacked realistic prospects or were not raised below; therefore no basis to disturb the Deputy Judge's decision.
26 Jul 2019

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

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1042
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL137/2018

Refusal to extend time and dismissal of the leave application: the applicant's delay of approximately 3.5 years was substantial and unexplained, the proposed grounds were broad and lacked particulars such that there was no prospect of practical relief, and subsequent events (withdrawal of earlier claim, repatriation and later failure to assert police risk) rendered any challenge academic; therefore no good reason to extend time and no practical justice in granting leave.
10 Jan 2012

LAW CHI YUEN v. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION

Citation

LAW CHI YUEN v. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL91/2011

Leave to apply for judicial review is to be granted only if the applicant's case is reasonably arguable; the court found no reasonably arguable case based solely on s6(a) DDO aided by the Code or legislative correspondence, but found that claims under s6(b) DDO and constitutional provisions (Basic Law art 25 and ICCPR art 26 read with Basic Law art 136) could be reasonably arguable on the facts before the court; consequently the court will permit amendment of the pleadings and further submissions and evidence before deciding on leave.
19 Nov 2009

FAN KIN NANG AND ANOTHER v. COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

Citation

FAN KIN NANG AND ANOTHER v. COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL112/2008

The application for judicial review was dismissed because the Commissioner subsequently issued the Determination rendering the dispute academic, the circumstances were highly unlikely to recur so there was no public interest reason to exercise the court's discretion to hear the moot issue, the contested Statement was not a separate reviewable decision, and the proposed amendment/leave failed the reasonable arguability threshold.
17 Jun 2008

RE LU DAYONG

Citation

RE LU DAYONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV139/2008

The court held that applications for judicial review challenging a trial judge's refusal to grant a permanent stay for deliberate breach of legal professional privilege are not categorically impermissible but are fact‑sensitive; no threshold higher than the arguability test was adopted; because judicial review is a remedy of last resort and satellite litigation in criminal cases is only acceptable in highly exceptional circumstances, the facts here did not justify collateral challenge and the court refused to certify the questions under section 32.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

RE NASEER MUHAMMAD

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

LAW CHI YUEN v. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION

FAN KIN NANG AND ANOTHER v. COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE

RE LU DAYONG