Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Merits consideration

Legal area

Court

4 Feb 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 424
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1241/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the Board's 19 July 2019 decision failed to consider the merits of the applicant's case as required by appellate authority at the time of the decision, and the subsequent amendment to s.37TZ (effective 1 August 2021) does not operate retrospectively to validate that omission.
31 Oct 2025

RE MOHAMMED ASLAM

Citation

[2025] HKCA 914
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV192/2025

The Court held that the Board did not adequately consider the merits of the applicant's out-of-time appeals despite asserting it had; consistent with Qasim Ali and s37ZT(2)(b) the Board was required to take account of merits (on paper) when assessing late filing, and consequently the appeal is allowed and leave to apply for judicial review is granted.
10 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4722
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1673/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted and time extended because the proposed judicial review disclosed a reasonably arguable ground that the TCAB erred by refusing to consider the merits as part of the assessment of whether to allow a late filing under s37ZT; although the applicant did not point to specific errors, the court found it reasonably arguable that the TCAB's omission warranted judicial review and permitted extension of time.
12 Aug 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3367
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL397/2020

The court granted leave and extended time because the Board refused late filing without apparent consideration of the merits contrary to the requirement under s.37ZT to take merits into account; the applicant's intended challenge was reasonably arguable and met the threshold for leave, and in view of relevant Court of Appeal authority and the prospect of success the court exercised its discretion to permit late filing and ordered filing of an originating summons within 14 days.
31 Jul 2025

MFUNDO RICHARD BARNABAS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3107
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL517/2021

Leave was granted because the Board, in refusing to allow the late filing of the notice of appeal, failed to take account of the merits or substance of the applicant's non-refoulement claim as a relevant matter under s37ZT(2)(b), rendering the intended judicial review reasonably arguable.
13 May 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1529
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2238/2020

Leave was granted because the Board failed to consider the merits of the applicant's claim when exercising its discretion on late filing, contrary to binding Court of Appeal authority; accordingly the applicant was permitted to apply for judicial review and given directions to issue proceedings within a fixed period.
6 Mar 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 697
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL357/2019

Leave granted because the Board, while applying the Begum framework, committed a procedural error of law by failing to consider the merits of the intended appeal as a possible special circumstance under s37ZT(2)(b) and thus acted unfairly in refusing the late filing without that consideration.
8 Apr 2022

SARKER MD MAMUN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1004
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL344/2019

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because the Board, in refusing to allow the late filing of the notice of appeal, failed to take account of the merits of the appeal as required by s37ZT(2)(b) as then in force; the omission made the intended challenge reasonably arguable and warranted judicial scrutiny despite subsequent legislative amendment and potential futility issues.
6 Dec 2021

RE AGAMA GEORGE HINNEH

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1845
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAMP86/2018

The application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any adequate explanation for an inordinate delay and failed to identify any question of great general or public importance such that the Court should exercise its discretion to extend time or grant leave under section 22(1)(b).
13 May 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 641
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL444/2018

Leave was granted because the applicant made a reasonably arguable case that the Appeal Board, in refusing to allow late filing, did not take account of the merits of the underlying appeal as required by s 37ZT(2)(b) and relevant Hong Kong Court of Appeal authority (Re Qasim Ali and related authorities); that omission raised an arguable error of law sufficient to meet the threshold for leave to apply for judicial review.