Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 380/2019

[2021] HKCFI 949

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 380 of 2019

BETWEEN

	Chinnasamy Karthik	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 Applicant being absent in open court;

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

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.The applicant filed Form 86 dated 11 February 2019 for application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Decision dated 1 February 2019 of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”)

2.By affirmation dated 7 April 2021, the applicant applied to this Court to withdraw his judicial review application, saying that he did not have any problem in his country.

3.It is clear that the applicant has no intention of proceeding with his application. As such, his application should be dismissed.

4.Accordingly, I accede to the applicant’s request and dismiss his application.

Dated the 14^th day of April 2021

	(M. O. WONG)(Ms)
	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 14 April 2021 Chinnasamy Karthik 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 14 April 2021 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: - Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 1018/18 (Formerly RBCZ 12621/16)(T614) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1

Cites 1 case

Cases cited in this judgment

Re Chinnasamy Karthik

HCAL 380/2019

High Court CFI17 Jun 2021

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case

Chinnasamy Karthik v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non Refoulement Claims Petiton Office

Court of Appeal08 Nov 2021

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 380/2019

Re Chinnasamy Karthik

High Court CFI17 Jun 2021

Chinnasamy Karthik v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office