Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Statutory appeal

Legal area

Court

5 Sept 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4051
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2325/2020

The application for leave to apply for judicial review was struck out because the Immigration Ordinance provides an available statutory appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board whose decision is final; the applicant did not pursue that appeal nor gave any special reason for not doing so, and proceeding by judicial review in those circumstances is an abuse of the statutory administrative structure.
5 Feb 2025

FUNG KING YAN v. JUDICIARY

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 513
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2504/2024

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because an adequate alternative remedy existed in the form of a statutory appeal under section 113 of the Magistrates Ordinance (no exceptional circumstances justified departure), and because the intended grounds lacked any reasonably arguable public law error with a realistic prospect of success.
31 Jan 2024

HO SUEN KO t/a SUN YIP ENGINEERING CO v. THE DIRECTOR OF FIRE SERVICES AND ANTOHER

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 189
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1837/2023

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because an adequate statutory appeal existed and no exceptional circumstances justified bypassing it; the proposed grounds lacked a reasonably arguable basis and the Suspension Order was within the Board's statutory powers; the application was also academic given the suspension expired.
31 Aug 2023

林建安 v. 大埔警區刑事調查隊第十二隊譚啟軒督察及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2143
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL386/2023

The application for judicial review was dismissed because the decision challenged was either not amenable to judicial review (the police's application for forfeiture was an interlocutory/intermediary act) or, in respect of the Forfeiture Order, the applicant had an adequate statutory remedy by way of appeal under ss113-114 of the Magistrates Ordinance which he had not pursued; therefore judicial review was not available.
21 Jul 2023

江海溥 v. 屋宇署署長 (建築事務監督)

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 882
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1521/2022

The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed because the Repair Order has been withdrawn and the Determination has in effect lapsed making the challenge academic, and in any event none of the intended grounds disclose arguable public law errors with a realistic prospect of success given the statutory appeal mechanism and the absence of prejudice or causal loss.
29 Jul 2022

MKOKO MARIAM RAMADHANI MOHAMED v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 2295
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1429/2021

The Director's Notice of 29 May 2020 was superseded by the Torture Claims Appeal Board's decision of 4 June 2021 following the applicant's statutory appeal under section 37ZR of the Immigration Ordinance; accordingly the Director's decision was no longer subject to judicial review. The applicant's Form 86 was therefore an abuse of process and the court dismissed the amended leave application and the withdrawal application, while allowing amendment of the proposed respondent's name to the Director of Immigration.
22 Jun 2022

SAYEAD ABU v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1861
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2426/2020

The application for leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the Director's Notice was superseded by the Board's decision and was not susceptible to judicial review in light of the statutory appeal under section 37ZR which the applicant had invoked; accordingly the leave application lacked any prospect of success and was dismissed on the merits.
12 Apr 2021

THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF TAK FAN LAU v. THE BUILDING AUTHORITY

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 902
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL2206/2020

The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed because the applicant failed to exhaust the available statutory appeal under s44(1) of the Buildings Ordinance and the leave application was substantially out of time with no adequate explanation; substantively the incorporated owners remain "owner" for service under s24(2) despite adverse possession and the Building Authority acted reasonably in requiring sufficient evidence before withdrawing the order.
27 Feb 2019

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

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 458
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1228/2018

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to permit review of the Director's decisions and there was no reasonable prospect of success against the Board's Decision given the Adjudicator's explicit credibility findings and proper case management.
20 Aug 2012

SIANO, CLARE PODSOK v. LIQUOR LICENSING BOARD

Citation

SIANO, CLARE PODSOK v. LIQUOR LICENSING BOARD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL97/2012

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because an adequate alternative remedy existed by way of appeal to the Municipal Services Appeals Board and the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances; the court also held that the Appeal Board, under MSABO s7(1) and applying PCCW-HKT, has an implied discretionary power to grant an interim stay pending appeal, rendering the judicial review claim non-arguable.