Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Statutory discretion under s37zt

Legal area

Court

23 Jun 2020

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

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 1278
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1790/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review was granted because it is at least arguable that the Board failed to give reasons for rejecting the applicant's detention explanation (thus miscalculating the period of delay), inappropriately relied on CPR 3.9 without regard to Hong Kong rules and Order 1A, and did not demonstrate that it considered all circumstances and the merits as required by s37ZT, making the Board's decision arguable on judicial review.
17 Aug 2016

ASM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Citation

ASM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL37/2015

The court dismissed the judicial review: TCAB's refusal to allow seven-day late filing on the basis that there was no reasonable excuse was within the range of reasonable decisions and not Wednesbury unreasonable; although it was procedurally unfair for TCAB to make material adverse findings on merits and credibility without an oral hearing, that unfairness did not entitle the applicant to relief because the primary lawful basis for refusal (no reasonable excuse to extend time) remained intact; accordingly the TCAB decision stands and relief is refused.