Haque Mohammad Obaidul v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 1280/2019[2020] HKCFI 766

Court

High Court CFI

Date12 May 2020

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 1280/2019

[2020] HKCFI 766

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1280 of 2019

BETWEEN

	Haque Mohammad Obaidul	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:

Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.This is the applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Decision dated 6 May 2019 of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board’s Decision”).

2.The applicant is a Bangladeshi national. He came to Hong Kong illegally through China on 9 November 2015. He was arrested by police on the same day and was referred to the Immigration Department on 11 November 2015. On 14 November 2015, he lodged his non-refoulement claim, which was rejected by the Director of Immigration by his decision dated 30 October 2018.

3.He appealed to the Board. The Board refused his appeal.

4.The applicant filed Form 86 on 14 May 2019 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision. The Court has not yet fixed a hearing date for his application.

5.By letter dated 11 March 2020, the applicant applied to withdraw his application for the reason that he wanted to go back to his own country as his problems in his country had solved.

6.In the circumstances, it is clear that the applicant has no intention of proceeding with his application, which should be dismissed.

CONCLUSION

7.Accordingly, I accede to his request and dismiss his application.

Dated the 12^th day of May 2020

	(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 12/5/2020 Haque Mohammad Obaidul 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 12/5/2020 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 14346/18/11/189/B1677 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 3132/18 (formerly RBCZ 14228/15) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Office (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1