Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Deemed withdrawal

Legal area

Court

22 Apr 2026

KISAMBALE PIUS HENRY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2305
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1104/2021

Leave refused because the Board lawfully applied ss.37ZT(2)-(3) and related provisions, correctly found an inordinate 21-month delay with no reasonable explanation or special circumstances, considered the merits where appropriate, and committed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the applicant therefore lacked a reasonably arguable prospect of success.
14 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2019
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL103/2026

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant had left Hong Kong and, under Section 37ZF of the Immigration Ordinance, the torture/non-refoulement claim is treated as withdrawn on departure including pending judicial review proceedings, so granting relief would serve no practical purpose.
27 Feb 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 691
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2411/2020

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the TCAB decision; the TCAB and DOI acted within the statutory scheme (s 37ZG) and reasonably refused to reopen the claim in the absence of any evidential basis; the application was also out of time and an extension was not warranted as the proposed judicial review was not reasonably arguable.
15 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4704
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL553/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant had been removed from Hong Kong and under s37ZF her torture/non-refoulement claim is deemed withdrawn, leaving no live controversy and no practical purpose for relief.
15 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4703
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL415/2023

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant had been removed from Hong Kong, Section 37ZF deems the torture/non-refoulement claim withdrawn on departure, the applicant's grounds were largely bare assertions without evidence, and granting relief would therefore serve no practical purpose (moot/otiose).
8 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2219
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL238/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the claimant had left Hong Kong such that the torture/non-refoulement claim was deemed withdrawn under s.37ZF of the Immigration Ordinance, the proceedings amounted to an abuse of process/res judicata with no outstanding matters, and granting relief would be otiose and serve no practical purpose.
26 Sept 2025

NGUYEN VAN TOAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4232
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1768/2020

Because the applicant had not submitted the completed NCF and thus provided no facts for the Board to assess, the Board properly exercised its discretion under the original statutory scheme (as at the relevant time) to refuse re-opening and extension; there was no reasonable prospect of success for judicial review and leave was dismissed.
26 Nov 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3210
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL919/2020

Leave was dismissed because section 37ZF treats a torture/non-refoulement claim as withdrawn upon the claimant's departure from Hong Kong, the applicant had been removed and admitted he was ready to return and not at risk, and therefore there was no live controversy and granting relief would serve no practical purpose.
19 Nov 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 3134
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1067/2020

Because the applicant had left Hong Kong and section 37ZF deems a torture/non-refoulement claim withdrawn on departure, and the applicant failed to raise any specific grounds to challenge the Board's decision, the application for leave was dismissed as it would serve no practical purpose.
11 Apr 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1015
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL489/2022

Where no Ewe Apla interpreter was available the claimant had a legal duty to use her best endeavours to complete and return the claim forms using available alternatives (common Ewe, French, assistance of family or legal aid); the Director and Board discharged their obligations and the Board's factual finding that the applicant failed to use best endeavours was lawful and not irrational; accordingly leave to judicially review was refused.