Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Time extension for appeal

Legal area

Court

26 Sept 2025

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

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 4232
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1768/2020

Because the applicant had not submitted the completed NCF and thus provided no facts for the Board to assess, the Board properly exercised its discretion under the original statutory scheme (as at the relevant time) to refuse re-opening and extension; there was no reasonable prospect of success for judicial review and leave was dismissed.
23 Jan 2024

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

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 159
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL754/2022

The Board correctly found the Director's decision was duly served; the applicant produced no evidence of due diligence or circumstances beyond her control as required by s37ZT, so the Board permissibly refused to allow late filing; consequently the applicant had no realistic prospect of success in judicial review and leave was refused.
28 Nov 2019

HKSAR v. CRISPO VIDA MIJIDE

Citation

[2019] HKCA 741
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC358/2018

The applicant's 28‑month delay was extraordinarily long and her proffered explanations were not credible or sufficient to justify extending time; on the merits none of her grounds were reasonably arguable because the sentencing judge correctly applied established guidelines (including starting point and international enhancement) and fairly assessed and discounted assistance; therefore leave to appeal out of time was refused.
12 Jul 2019

RE SHAHI YASODA

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1660
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL311/2018

Applicant failed to identify any error in the Deputy Judge's refusal of leave and conceded she had no grounds; applying the Court of Appeal's criteria for extension of time, there was no prospect of success and no justification for granting an extension, therefore the application is dismissed.
29 Dec 2009

WIN PROFIT CORPORATION LTD v. WORLD ORIENT INVESTMENT LTD

Citation

WIN PROFIT CORPORATION LTD v. WORLD ORIENT INVESTMENT LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1487/2009

The Deputy High Court Judge found the Master's case management orders were unreasonable in the circumstances of a first call-over: the $50,000 payment into court and certificate for counsel order were excessive and should be revoked; a longer period to file evidence should have been ordered and the three-hour assessment estimate was manifestly inadequate. Time to bring the appeals was enlarged and the Master's orders varied accordingly.
27 May 1997

FUNG KAI YIN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

Citation

FUNG KAI YIN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV218/1996

The appeal was struck out because the Notice of Appeal did not disclose any appealable question of law and the appellant was out of time without having sought leave to extend time; the appellant's failure to amend the Notice despite opportunity was treated as deliberate, rendering the appeal incompetent.

Hong Kong Case Law

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

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

HKSAR v. CRISPO VIDA MIJIDE

RE SHAHI YASODA

WIN PROFIT CORPORATION LTD v. WORLD ORIENT INVESTMENT LTD

FUNG KAI YIN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS