Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interpreter and legal assistance

Legal area

Court

6 May 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCA 798
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV297/2025

The appeal is dismissed because the Judge correctly refused leave: the applicant failed to raise viable grounds, could not raise unpleaded complaints for the first time on appeal, did not demonstrate that lack of interpreter or legal assistance caused prejudice, and there was no demonstrable legal or procedural error in the Board's decision warranting judicial review.
23 Aug 2022

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

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2499
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL677/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were supported by the record, there was no procedural unfairness or error of law (including regarding translation or legal assistance), and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable.
20 Jul 2022

RE AKTHER MST RAMA

Citation

[2022] HKCA 1025
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV87/2022

The Court of Appeal upheld the Deputy Judge's refusal of leave because no viable ground was advanced to show error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's assessment of credibility, COI and risks fell within its primary fact-finding role and the applicant suffered no prejudice from the level of interpreter or legal assistance provided.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

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

RE AKTHER MST RAMA