Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Merits

Legal area

Court

26 Mar 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1515
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL445/2022

The leave application was dismissed because it was filed about three months out of time without explanation and the proposed judicial review was not reasonably arguable given that the Board's decision was comprehensive, supported reasons, and contained no identifiable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; therefore no extension of time was warranted.
27 Jul 2022

董旺建 v. 香港特別行政區行政長官及另一人

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2300
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL392/2022

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant failed to identify any comprehensible or proper grounds of review as required by RHC Order 53 r 3(2)(a)(iii), rendering the application not reasonably arguable and without any realistic prospect of success; accordingly leave is refused without need to decide issues of delay or standing.
6 Jan 2022

RE SULTONIAH BUKHORI

Citation

[2022] HKCA 22
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV375/2021

Extension of time was refused and the notice of motion dismissed because the applicant provided no explanation for the delay and, on the merits, the statutory criteria in s22(1)(b) for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal were not satisfied; consequently leave to appeal was refused.
24 Jul 2019

RE MOHAMMED SHAMIUL HAQUE

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1671
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL586/2018

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to provide any good reason for over nine months' delay, his grounds were not reasonably arguable, there was no error of law or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's process, and there was no reasonable prospect of success in the intended appeal.
10 Dec 2018

LEUNG KIT-HING, DORIS v. THE MAGISTRATE-IN-CHARGE OF ALL CASE MANAGEMENT MATTERS AT KOWLOON CITY MAGISTRATES’ COURTS AND OTHERS

Citation

[2018] HKCA 919
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV104/2018

The Court refused urgent leave because the applicant failed to demonstrate any question of great and general public importance as required by s22(1)(b) of the Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap 484, and because the intended appeal was without merit.
30 Jul 2002

SKYRIVER (B.V.I.) LTD. & ANOTHER v. SHOUGANG HOLDING (HK) LTD.

Citation

SKYRIVER (B.V.I.) LTD. & ANOTHER v. SHOUGANG HOLDING (HK) LTD.
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA17196/1999

The 1st plaintiff was held to be ordinarily resident outside Hong Kong based on its BVI registration, registered office, lack of assets or business in Hong Kong, absence of evidence of central management in Hong Kong and appointment of a Hong Kong agent; accordingly the court had jurisdiction to order security for costs and, exercising its discretion, reduced the quantum of security to HK$500,000 payable by the 1st plaintiff (up to discovery and exchange of witness statements).
1 Nov 1999

TSE JEEKEEN v. "HK ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT OF PATRIOTIC MOVEMENT OF CHINA" & ITS CHAIRMAN MR SZETO WAH AND OTHERS

Citation

TSE JEEKEEN v. "HK ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT OF PATRIOTIC MOVEMENT OF CHINA" & ITS CHAIRMAN MR SZETO WAH AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMV19/1999

Leave to appeal refused because the application was wholly without merit: the claim had been properly struck out, the applicant had unsuccessfully pursued repeated appeals, and there was no arguable basis to justify further appellate intervention.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

董旺建 v. 香港特別行政區行政長官及另一人

RE SULTONIAH BUKHORI

RE MOHAMMED SHAMIUL HAQUE

LEUNG KIT-HING, DORIS v. THE MAGISTRATE-IN-CHARGE OF ALL CASE MANAGEMENT MATTERS AT KOWLOON CITY MAGISTRATES’ COURTS AND OTHERS

SKYRIVER (B.V.I.) LTD. & ANOTHER v. SHOUGANG HOLDING (HK) LTD.

TSE JEEKEEN v. "HK ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT OF PATRIOTIC MOVEMENT OF CHINA" & ITS CHAIRMAN MR SZETO WAH AND OTHERS