Re Dilsoz Ab Khaliq

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 1645/2018 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 2 July 2020.

1. The applicant is an illegal immigrant and he lodged a non‑refoulement claim with the Director of Immigration (“ the Director ”). The Director rejected his application and he appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“ the Board ”). Having considered his evidence, the Board, by its Decision dated 3 August 2018 (“ the Board’s Decision ”), rejected his appeal and confirmed the Director’s Decisions.

Cites 2 cases

Case No.HCAL 1645/2018[2020] HKCFI 1379
Court
High Court CFI
Date02 Jul 2020
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL 1645/2018

[2020] HKCFI 1379

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 1645 OF 2018

____________________

Re: Dilsoz Ab Khaliq Applicant

____________________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung in Chambers

Date of Hearing:  6 May 2020

Date of Decision:  2 July 2020

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

The application

1.The applicant is an illegal immigrant and he lodged a non‑refoulement claim with the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). The Director rejected his application and he appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). Having considered his evidence, the Board, by its Decision dated 3 August 2018 (“the Board’s Decision”), rejected his appeal and confirmed the Director’s Decisions.

2.Pursuant to Order 53, rule 3(2) of the Rules of the High Court, the applicant filed Form No. 86 to apply for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision. He had failed to appear before this Court and his application was considered on paper. By Order dated 6 December 2019 (“the Court’s decision”), I refused to grant him leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision for the reason that there was no reasonable prospect of success in his intended judicial review.

3.The applicant intends to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the Court’s decision. However, he is out of time under Order 53, rule 3(4), RHC. The deadline for him to appeal is 20 December 2019. He filed a summons on 15 January 2020 for extension of time for his appeal. A hearing was fixed for him. However, he did not appear in court.

4.He filed an affirmation in support of his application for extension of time. His reason for the delay is that he had moved to another address. He did not receive the Court’s Decision within time.

Discussion

5.I have, in my decision, set out the reasons why I refused to grant him leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision. He has given no reason to say that my decision was wrong.

6.In the circumstances, I find that the applicant is unable to show that he has any reasonable prospect of success in his intended appeal against my decision. Accordingly, I dismiss his application.

  (K.W. Lung)
  Deputy High Court Judge

The applicant was absent.