Nguyen Thi Hoang Yen v. Torture Claims Appeal Board and Another

Case No.HCAL 1347/2018[2020] HKCFI 1136

Court

High Court CFI

Date11 Jun 2020

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 1347/2018

[2020] HKCFI 1136

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LISTNo. 1347 of 2018

BETWEEN

	Nguyen Thi Hoang Yen	Applicant
	and
	Torture Claims Appeal Board	1^st Putative Respondent
	Director of Immigration	2^nd Putative Respondent

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following:

	consideration of the documents only; or
	consideration of the documents and oral submissions by (counsel for) the Applicant in open court / the Applicant being absent in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan:

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.The Applicant is a national of Vietnam who entered Hong Kong illegally on 10 October 2016 and surrendered to the Immigration Department on 11 October 2016 when she subsequently raised a non-refoulement claim on the basis that if she returned to Vietnam she would be harmed or killed by her creditors for failing to repay her loan.

2.On 23 January 2018 her claim was rejected by the Director of Immigration. She then lodged an appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board which was dismissed on 20 June 2018.

3.On 10 July 2018 she filed her Form 86 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s decision, but no ground for seeking relief was given in her Form, and in her supporting affirmation of the same date she merely repeated her claim that she would be harmed or killed by her creditors if she was to return to Vietnam.

4.However, before her application could be dealt with by the court, on 1 June 2020 she filed an affirmation requesting to withdraw her application because “her problem of debt had been solved by her family in Vietnam and that it would be safe for her to return to her home” in Vietnam as she also wants to take care of her son.

5.As such and given the fact that the basis of her claim no longer exists, it would be appropriate for her application to be dismissed rather than withdrawn. Accordingly I dismiss her application.

Dated the 11^th day of June 2020.

(NG Hang-yin)
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 his 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^th June 2020 Nguyen Thi Hoang Yen 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^th June 2020 Torture Claims Appeal Board 1^st Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 10128/18/2/12/V1972 Director of Immigration 2^nd Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: Nil. Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Office (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1