Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Paper determination

Legal area

Court

28 Jan 2026

TRINH THI OANH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 73
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL117/2021

Extension of time was refused because the decision was properly sent to the applicant's last known address and thus deemed received, the applicant gave no valid reasons for the delay, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success as the Board reasonably found state protection and internal relocation available; accordingly the application was dismissed.
28 Nov 2025

RE KARTINI

Citation

[2025] HKCA 1047
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV91/2025

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to identify any question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) of Cap.484 and provided only vague assertions; no basis was shown under the "or otherwise" limb, so statutory requirements for leave were not met.
30 May 2022

RE KHAN BAKHTIAR

Citation

[2022] HKCA 765
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV66/2022

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate that the proposed appeal raised a question of great general or public importance under s22(1)(b) of Cap.484, the matters advanced lacked merit, and there was no basis to grant leave under the "otherwise" limb; accordingly statutory requirements for leave were not satisfied.
24 May 2022

RE HUSSAIN ADNAN

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1445
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1525/2021

Although the court condoned the delay occasioned by the applicant's detention and pandemic, the application for extension was refused because the intended appeal and underlying judicial review had no realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility and factual findings were within its province, the application sought effectively to re‑argue facts rather than identify errors of law or procedure, and allowing the appeal would be abusive and prejudicial to public administration.
26 Apr 2021

莊裕安 v. 終審法院司法常務官

Citation

[2021] HKCA 494
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV217/2019

The second Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal was an abuse of process because the applicant had been directed to apply to the Appeal Committee within the prescribed time and the issues raised (including panel composition) did not fall within the scope of these appeals; accordingly the second application was struck out and dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

TRINH THI OANH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RE KARTINI

RE KHAN BAKHTIAR

RE HUSSAIN ADNAN

莊裕安 v. 終審法院司法常務官