Kellapatha Supun Thilina and Others v. Torture Claims Appeal Board and Another

Case No.HCAL 182/2019[2021] HKCFI 2768

Court

High Court CFI

Date14 Sep 2021

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 182/2019

[2021] HKCFI 2768

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No 182 of 2019

BETWEEN

	Kellapatha Supun Thilina	1^st Applicant
	Paththini Kuttige Nadeeka Dilrukshi Nonis	2^nd Applicant
	Kellapatha Sethumdi Thilanya Kellapatha	3^rd Applicant
	Kellapatha Suvasthaki Vithika Dinath	4^th 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 be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.The Applicants are a married couple and their two minor children of Sri Lankan nationality who have raised various claims for non-refoulement protection with the Immigration Department, and after their claims had been rejected by the Director of Immigration (“Director”) and the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“Board”), they then filed their Form 86 on 18 January 2019 in these proceedings for leave to apply for judicial review of both the decisions of the Director and the Board.

2.However, before their application could be dealt with by the court, the Applicants on 7 September 2021 wrote to the court to request to “cancel” their application as they have been accepted for settlement in Canada and are set to leave Hong Kong for Canada by end of September 2021.

3.Accordingly, I accede to their request and dismiss their leave application.

Dated the 14^th day of September 2021.

(TAM Kam-man)
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 14^th September 2021 Kellapatha Supun Thilina Paththini Kuttige Nadeeka Dilrukshi Nonis Kellapatha Sethumdi Thilanya Kellapatha Kellapatha Suvasthaki Vithika Dinath 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^th September 2021 Torture Claims Appeal Board 1^st Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 7251-54/17/5/257-60/S145-48 Director of Immigration 2^nd Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: QA T/C 2656/16 (formerly RBCZ 2001407/14)(T7S38) QA T/C 2669/16 (Formerly RBCZ 2002142/14)(T7S125) QA T/C 2670/16 (Formerly RBCZ 2002143/14) QA T/C 2675/16 (Formerly RBCZ 12960/16) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1