Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial review - leave to apply

Legal area

Court

6 May 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2413
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1415/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision, failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success, and the Board's factual findings (no risk of harm, internal relocation viable, state protection available) were supported by the evidence.
27 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2232
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL259/2022

The Leave Application is dismissed because the Applicant failed to particularise effective public law grounds; the Board provided adequate, comprehensive reasons and legitimately rejected the Applicant's credibility and factual claims, and there is no identifiable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality that would make the application reasonably arguable.
22 Apr 2026

PURNAMASARI YULI acting as guardian ad litem of YULI PURNAMASARI SEINA YUKARI GASHEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2029
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1310/2025

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success or arguable public law error: the Board reasonably found state protection, welfare and education would be available in Indonesia, language and relocation issues were resolvable, and there was no basis for upsetting the Board's factual findings.
22 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2176
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL226/2024

The Court dismissed the application for leave to apply for judicial review because the applicant on his own motion withdrew the application, there was no evidence the withdrawal was other than voluntary, and there was no outstanding matter in the action; accordingly dismissal was the proper concluding order rather than leaving the action at large.
17 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2107
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL972/2021

Because the Immigration Department granted the applicant permission to stay in Hong Kong and he no longer required non-refoulement protection, the court dismissed the application for leave to apply for judicial review and amended the Form 86 on its own motion.
9 Apr 2026

UDDIN ARMAN ZIA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 589
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV677/2025

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable grounds to reverse the judge's refusal of leave to apply for judicial review; no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated and the court's review is confined to the grounds advanced.
17 Mar 2026

NGUYEN HUY CHUNG v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1357
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1543/2021

The applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite significant change of circumstances under s37ZO or that he had been denied a fair opportunity to clarify his case; the Director's decision to refuse the subsequent claim was rational and lawful, therefore leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed.
17 Mar 2026

HASAN MOHAMMAD KAMRUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1579
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL831/2021

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by detailed reasons and oral evidence; and the Board and Director reasonably concluded that internal relocation negated non-refoulement risk, so there was no prospect of success.
10 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1324
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1288/2021

Leave was refused because the Board's adverse credibility finding and conclusion that there was no real risk to life or persecution were not shown to involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; issues about COI were immaterial where the claim was found incredible, and the applicant failed to particularise how any heightened duty to a self-represented claimant was breached.
10 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1239
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL378/2022

Refusal to grant extension of time and dismissal of leave application because the Form was filed over two years late with no explanation or extension application, and the proposed grounds were not reasonably arguable—the Board's decision was comprehensive and free of error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, so leave was refused.