Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Right to life (article 2 bor)

Legal area

Court

16 Apr 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 1959
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2367/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to particularise any reasonably arguable public law grounds; the TCAB/NRCPO had lawfully and rationally assessed evidence, state protection and internal relocation and found no real risk on Torture, BOR2, BOR3 or Persecution grounds; no procedural unfairness or error of law was established to justify judicial review.
6 Feb 2026

KARIUKI ALICE MURUGI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 778
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL69/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness by the Torture Claims Appeal Board; the Board had considered all relevant non‑refoulement grounds, made adverse credibility findings based on substantial inconsistencies, and properly treated the matter as a private/family dispute such that there was no basis for judicial review.
28 Jan 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 85
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1290/2020

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable grounds; the TCAB/NRCPO's findings on credibility, risk, state protection and internal relocation were within its province and supported by evidence; there was no demonstrable procedural unfairness, error of law or irrationality sufficient to vitiate the decision, so the leave application had no realistic prospect of success.
13 Jan 2026

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

Citation

[2026] HKCFI 170
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1088/2021

Leave was denied because the TCAB conducted an adequate assessment, considered Article 2 and country information, made a credibility-based factual finding against the Applicant without demonstrable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the Applicant failed to particularise any arguable legal errors — therefore the proposed judicial review was not reasonably arguable.
22 Dec 2025

FRAZ DIL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6141
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL70/2020

Leave refused because the Form 86 and affirmation failed to specify any arguable ground; the applicant did not demonstrate legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness by DoI or TCAB; TCAB's factual findings that the matter was a private land dispute and that internal relocation or sale of land were available were not shown to be unreasonable; applicant's absence and failure to augment submissions reinforced refusal.
19 Dec 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 6219
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1176/2025

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error in the Board's Decision; the Board's findings that the state had taken reasonable protective measures, that there was no state involvement in the applicant's past harm, and that internal relocation in Pakistan was viable were within the Board's fact-finding remit and not legally challengeable, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.
17 Oct 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4983
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1289/2020

Leave was refused because the applicant's sole ground was generic and unparticularised, the parts challenging the Director's decision were not reviewable after appeal to the TCAB/NRCPO, and the TCAB/NRCPO's findings on state protection and internal relocation were not shown to be legally erroneous, procedurally unfair or irrational under the enhanced Wednesbury standard.
22 Aug 2025

RANA MD RASEDUI ISLAM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 3619
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL553/2020

The court dismissed the leave application because, after anxious scrutiny and applying the enhanced Wednesbury standard, the TCAB/NRCPO afforded fair procedure and made lawful, rational findings on credibility, risk and internal relocation; the Applicant has no reasonably arguable grounds with a realistic prospect of success; applications to add family members or to consolidate were refused because they lack direct interest, would be abusive or futile, and would cause undue delay.
2 Jul 2025

HUSSAIN MAHTAB v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2637
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL328/2020

The applicant failed to plead particularised, reasonably arguable grounds with realistic prospects of success; the Board’s decision displayed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality after anxious scrutiny; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review is refused.
18 Feb 2025

ALI AMANAT v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 534
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2037/2024

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings, conclusion that claimed incidents were unproven, and findings on availability of state protection and internal relocation were within its fact‑finding remit and gave no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.