Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Legal representation

Legal area

Court

11 May 2026

SHAFIQUE MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 701
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV712/2025

The appeal is dismissed because the application for leave was out of time without adequate excuse, the new complaints were not raised below and lacked merit, the applicant declined offered legal assistance, and no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated such as to justify interfering with the Judge's refusal of leave.
6 May 2026

RE RANJODH SINGH

Citation

[2026] HKCA 910
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP42/2023

Extension of time refused because the Leave Decision was effectively served at the applicant's last known address and not returned, the applicant offered no reasonable explanation for delay and had sought cancellation of his leave, he failed to identify any error of law or procedural unfairness warranting intervention, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success.
30 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCA 783
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV388/2025

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant advanced only general, unparticularised allegations that did not demonstrate any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Judge's refusal of leave; the Judge did not err in refusing leave.
15 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCA 579
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV839/2025

The applicant failed to identify or substantiate any error in the Judge's refusal to grant leave; the grounds were bare allegations without particulars and therefore no viable basis existed to overturn the refusal of leave; appeal dismissed.
8 Apr 2026

BALAKRISHNAN MAHESWARAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 633
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV553/2025

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable public law error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's factual conclusions or in the Judge's refusal of leave; lack of entitlement to free legal representation or continuous interpretation and deference to the Board's fact findings govern the outcome.
1 Apr 2026

MOHAMMED NASIM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 568
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP72/2025

The delay in seeking appeal was substantial and inexcusable because the applicant failed to notify change of address; accordingly he must demonstrate a real prospect of success on the merits and he failed to do so because the Board had addressed the relevant grounds and the applicant produced no evidence to refute the Board's findings; therefore extension of time to appeal is refused and the summons dismissed.
1 Apr 2026

AKTHER SALMAN AHAD (a minor) by AKTHER PARVIN, his next friend v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1902
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1262/2025

Leave dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal ground; the Board's decision showed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board's factual findings, COI assessment and conclusion on internal relocation were within its remit and met the enhanced Wednesbury standard.
31 Mar 2026

BOMBUWALA DEWAGE INOKA DILRUKSHI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1791
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1147/2022

Leave was refused because the applicant's grounds were vague, factually unsupported and not reasonably arguable; the TCAB had considered the evidence, applied correct legal principles, made legitimate credibility and factual findings, and there was no demonstrated error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality warranting judicial review.
30 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1726
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL614/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board's decision contained adequate reasons, the applicant suffered no procedural unfairness or prejudice from lack of representation or interpretation at every stage, the Board lawfully determined the appeal without a hearing, and the proposed challenge was not reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success.
19 Mar 2026

ANAZODO GODSON NCHEKWUBE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 481
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP136/2025

Delay of about one and a half months was inexcusable; interpreter services had been provided at hearings and documents were in English; applicant had prior legal representation; therefore applicant failed to show a real prospect of success and extension of time to appeal was refused applying the standard multi-factor test for extensions.