Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Removal policy

Legal area

Court

28 Aug 2025

ENI CARINI v. HONG KONG SAR GOVERNMENT

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3699
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1389/2025

Detention remained lawful because the Director demonstrated diligence and removal was practicable after issuance of a replacement travel document; the applicant's own persistent non-cooperation and late SC Request materially prolonged detention and created a real risk of absconding and (re)offending, such that the 252-day detention was reasonable under s32(4A) and applicable authorities.
14 Jun 2023

D’SOUZA MARK PHILLIP GARCIA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1584
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL842/2023

Detention was lawful because by reference to the Hardial Singh principles the detention was for the purpose of effecting removal, the period was reasonable, removal was likely within a reasonable time (imminent removal arranged), and the Director had acted with reasonable diligence and expedition.
5 Jun 2023

RASUL GOLAM v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1507
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL799/2023

The court found the continued detention lawful: the Secretary/Director intended to deport the applicant, acted with reasonable diligence and expedition to obtain travel documentation despite the applicant's persistent non-cooperation, and there was a real risk of absconding and of reoffending; balancing the Hardial Singh factors the detention for the additional 162 days (total 855 days) remained reasonable and lawful, so the habeas corpus application was dismissed.
26 Apr 2023

MD YAZDANI v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 1046
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL186/2023

The leave application disclosed no reasonably arguable public law ground. The Director lawfully acted under powers in the Immigration Ordinance and properly applied the updated removal policy which does not displace the statutory power to deport; procedural fairness did not require delay until the CFA given the applicant's long, repeatedly rejected non-refoulement claim and absence of evidence that the Director failed to consider individual circumstances. The leave application is dismissed and costs are payable by the applicant subject to summary assessment.
23 Dec 2022

AZAM ADEEL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 3778
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1306/2022

The applicant remains lawfully detained under a valid Deportation Order and s32(3) Cap 115; the Director and Secretary acted with reasonable diligence to obtain travel documentation and to arrange removal; the applicant’s history of absconding and offending, and his repeated filing of unmeritorious proceedings intended to delay removal, justify continued detention as reasonable under Hardial Singh principles; recent dismissals of leave applications and the updated removal policy make removal likely in the near future, so the habeas corpus application is dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

ENI CARINI v. HONG KONG SAR GOVERNMENT

D’SOUZA MARK PHILLIP GARCIA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

RASUL GOLAM v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

MD YAZDANI v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

AZAM ADEEL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER