Gurmit Singh v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Read the full judgment text of HCAL 649/2017 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment.
1. This applicant filed a notice of application for leave to apply for judicial review on 15 September 2017. He sought to judicial review the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 14 July 2017. The adjudicator of the Board rejected his appeal of the determination made by the Director of Immigration on 7 October 2015 and 22 March 2017. The Director had rejected his non-refoulement protection claim on all applicable grounds.
|
HCAL649/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 649 of 2017 BETWEEN
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3) Following;
Order by Deputy High Court Judge Woodcock:
Observations for the Applicant (Order by Deputy High Court Judge Woodcock): 1.This applicant filed a notice of application for leave to apply for judicial review on 15 September 2017. He sought to judicial review the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 14 July 2017. The adjudicator of the Board rejected his appeal of the determination made by the Director of Immigration on 7 October 2015 and 22 March 2017. The Director had rejected his non-refoulement protection claim on all applicable grounds. 2.The applicant requested an oral hearing of his application and a hearing date was set down for 28 February 2018. The applicant confirmed during the hearing that he had written to the court on 7 February 2018 to say he had made an application for legal aid and wanted an adjournment. In court, he could not remember the date of his application and had no record of it; the court had no memorandum from the legal aid so proceeded with the hearing with the applicant in person. 3.After I summarised his grounds, he confirmed they were accurate. I then asked the applicant if he had anything to add to his grounds or if he had anything he wished to say to supplement his grounds. The applicant then informed the Court that he wished to withdraw his leave application because he intended to inform the immigration Department that he wanted to go home immediately. 4.I clarified his intentions further; the applicant confirmed that he had spoken with his family in India and his mother was seriously ill in hospital and he wanted to leave Hong Kong to return home. Being satisfied he understood the consequences of withdrawing his application, I then granted the applicant leave to withdraw it. Dated 28th day of February 2018.
Where leave to apply has been granted, Applicants and their legal advisers are reminded of their obligation to reconsider the merits of their application in the light of the Respondent’s evidence
Form CALL-1 |