Hesham Saeed Aly Mahmoud Elgendy v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 2435/2018[2019] HKCFI 2505

Court

High Court CFI

Date11 Oct 2019

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL2435/2018

[2019] HKCFI 2505

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2435 of 2018

BETWEEN

	Hesham Saeed Aly Mahmoud Elgendy	Applicant
	and
	Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office	Putative Respondent
	and
	Director of Immigration	Putative Interested Party

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following;

	consideration of documents only; or
	consideration of documents and oral submission by the Applicant in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung:

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.The applicant is an Egyptian national who came to Hong Kong on 30 March 2016 as a visitor. He overstayed and surrendered himself to the Immigration Department for non‑refoulement protection.

2.His claim was rejected by the Director of Immigration by Notice of Decision dated 31 August 2017.

3.He appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). By Decision dated 14 September 2018, the Board refused his appeal.

4.Pursuant to Order 53, rule 3 of the Rules of the High Court, he filed Form 86 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

5.By letter dated 2 October 2019, his solicitor wrote to this Court, saying that his client had been accepted by Canada as an asylum seeker. On behalf of his client, he applied to withdraw his client’s application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

6.In the circumstances, the application serves no purpose. Accordingly, I dismiss his application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

Dated the 11^th day of October 2019

	(Mike Mak)
	for Registrar, High Court

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

Notes for the Applicant: If leave has been granted, the Applicant or the Applicant’s solicitors must:
a) serve on the respondent and such interested parties as may be directed by the Court the order granting leave and any directions given within 14 days after the leave was granted (Order 53, rule 4A); b) issue the originating summons within 14 days after the grant of leave and serve it in accordance with Order 53, rule 5; and c) supply to every other party copies of every affidavit which the Applicant proposes to use at the hearing, including the affidavit in support of the application for leave (Order 53, rule 6(5)).		Sent to the Applicant on 11/10/2019 Hesham Saeed Aly Mahmoud Elgendy Applicant’s ref. no: Nil.		Sent to the Putative Respondent / the Putative Respondent’s solicitors / such Putative Interested Parties as may be directed by the Court / the Putative Interested Parties’ solicitors on 11/10/2019 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 8455/17/9/127/E68 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 1239/17(Formerly RBCZ 12609/16) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Office (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1