Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial review leave requirement

Legal area

Court

17 Dec 2025

PHOMPHAKDY ME v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6270
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2218/2025

The leave application is dismissed because it was filed out of time by more than nine months without satisfactory explanation and, on merits, the Board's Decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable ground for judicial review and therefore leave is refused.
10 Jun 2021

LAI KIN YANG TIMOTHY v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1677
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1239/2020

Amendment summonses introducing public law challenges to the lawfulness of search warrants, and prayers for return of seized materials based on irrelevance and for injunctive relief, were dismissed as beyond the jurisdiction of these originating summons proceedings and as an abuse of process under the exclusivity principle; the court permitted amendments relating to private law claims for trespass/conversion/detinue (which the Commissioner did not oppose); the interlocutory injunction (HCMP1217) was dismissed and s16 CPO precludes granting injunctions against the Crown in these private procee…
10 Jun 2021

NEXT DIGITAL LTD AND OTHERS v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1677
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP1217/2020

The court dismissed the proposed amendments that seek to challenge the lawfulness of the search warrants and refused the interlocutory injunction application because (1) challenges to warrant validity are within the exclusive purview of judicial review and permitting them in private originating summonses would be an abuse of process, (2) the proposed return/irrelevance remedies require premature determination of evidential relevance in ongoing criminal (national security) investigations, and (3) injunctions against the Commissioner in his representative capacity are precluded by CPO s16; amen…
12 May 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 762
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1724/2018

The application for extension of time and for leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board, having accepted the applicant's factual account, lawfully evaluated the evidence and correctly concluded there were no substantial grounds for risk of torture, CIDTP or violation of right to life, that state protection or internal relocation was available, and the proposed judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success.

Hong Kong Case Law

PHOMPHAKDY ME v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

LAI KIN YANG TIMOTHY v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

NEXT DIGITAL LTD AND OTHERS v. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

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