Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Language access

Legal area

Court

27 Feb 2026

KHAN JAMSHAD v. NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 90
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1466/2020

The summons for an extension of time was dismissed because the delay was only one day, the Applicant failed to identify any arguable ground of appeal or any error of law, his claim of not understanding English was contradicted by English filings with translation clauses and produced no identified prejudice, and granting an extension would be futile and needlessly prejudicial to the respondent.
26 Mar 2021

RE SHAH WALEED

Citation

[2021] HKCA 381
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV170/2020

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b); factual findings showed he had access to language assistance and earlier legal representation, and the Director and the Board had provided adequate reasons for rejecting his non‑refoulement claim, so no arguable point meriting the Court of Final Appeal was established.
11 Mar 2020

CUCUN FATIMAH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2020] HKCA 134
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP151/2019

Extension of time for filing an application for leave to appeal was refused because the application was 20 days late, the applicant provided no explanation for the delay, the proposed appeal lacked sufficient merits and did not raise any question of great general or public importance under section 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, and no prejudice‑based or 'or otherwise' justification was shown.
16 Jul 2019

LUONG THI DAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1783
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1013/2017

Extension of time refused because the applicant failed to provide credible and sufficient explanation for a 129‑day delay, there were available avenues of assistance which she did not pursue, and there was no prospect of success in the intended appeal or in the underlying judicial review; accordingly it was not in the interests of justice to grant an extension.
30 May 2019

RE ISLAM MD NAZRUL

Citation

[2019] HKCA 599
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV525/2018

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the matters raised did not involve any question of great general or public importance and therefore did not satisfy section 22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance; the judge had properly and sufficiently reviewed the Board's decision.
20 Sept 2018

RE DEEP SINGH

Citation

[2018] HKCA 614
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV163/2018

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the proposed grounds were case‑specific and not of sufficient general or public importance under s22(1)(b) Cap 484, were not reasonably arguable, and the applicant had procedurally elected paper disposal by failing to request an oral hearing and to comply with directions, leaving no basis to grant leave.

Hong Kong Case Law

KHAN JAMSHAD v. NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RE SHAH WALEED

CUCUN FATIMAH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER

LUONG THI DAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RE ISLAM MD NAZRUL

RE DEEP SINGH