Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Refoulement risk assessment

Legal area

Court

18 May 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 2258
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL638/2022

The Board considered the evidence and COI, applied the correct legal test, provided adequate reasons and reached conclusions that the Applicant had not established entitlement to non‑refoulement protection; there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and therefore no reasonably arguable ground for judicial review, so leave is dismissed.
12 May 2026

MOHAMMAD ZAHID QURESHI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2026] HKCA 957
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV164/2026

The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable ground showing public law error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision or in the Judge's refusal of leave; the Board's adverse findings on ongoing risk and the applicant's level of political commitment were factual findings open to it and do not amount to reviewable error.
10 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1392
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1471/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable public law error in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and risk assessment were reasonable and the Board had conducted anxious scrutiny; extension of time was refused on the basis of lack of merits.
30 Dec 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6363
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL158/2021

The Board's adverse credibility and factual findings were not shown to involve any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, the applicant provided no particulars or supporting affidavit and had nothing further to add at the hearing; consequently the intended challenge was not reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success and leave was refused.
17 Dec 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6015
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1248/2024

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable grounds in his Form 86, did not demonstrate any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision, and the Board had correctly applied the law and observed a high standard of fairness; the applicant later sought withdrawal, and there was nothing outstanding requiring further proceedings.
13 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4668
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1306/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review denied because the applicant failed to advance identifiable grounds or make full disclosure in Form 86 and the Board's decision that there was no real risk on refoulement, adequate state protection and viable internal relocation was a factual conclusion not vitiated by error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, thus the challenge was not reasonably arguable with realistic prospects of success.
30 Jul 2024

RE TRAN VAN HOANG

Citation

[2024] HKCA 728
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV322/2023

The Deputy Judge correctly refused leave because the applicant failed to present reasonably arguable grounds or particulars to challenge the Board's adverse credibility findings; absent demonstrated legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality the Court will not interfere with the Board's fact‑finding; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
15 Mar 2019

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

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 623
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1081/2018

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to establish any reasonable prospect of success; his procedural complaints were unsubstantiated, the Board's adverse credibility and risk findings were supported by the record, and therefore the court would not grant leave.