Lp and Others v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 2583/2019[2022] HKCFI 2443

Court

High Court CFI

Date17 Aug 2022

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 2583/2019

[2022] HKCFI 2443

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2583 OF 2019

BETWEEN
	LP	1^st Applicant
	KD	2^nd Applicant
	KL	3^rd Applicant
	KS	4^th 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 the documents only; or

consideration of the documents and oral submissions by the Applicant in open court.

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

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

THE APPLICATION

1.The 1^st applicant is the mother of the other applicants. They are illegal immigrants by staying in Hong Kong without the permission of the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). They lodged non-refoulement claim with the Immigration Department and was rejected by the Director. They jointly appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “Board”) and, by the Board’s Decision dated 4 June 2019 (the “Board’s Decision”), their appeal was dismissed.

2.The applicants filed Form 86 dated 4 September 2019 for application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

3.By letter dated 22 July 2022, Messrs. Daly & Associates, the solicitors acting for the applicants informed the Court that the applicants decided to accept voluntary repatriation to Indonesia despite their fear of harm upon return and they intended not to continue their judicial review proceedings in order to return to Indonesia as soon as possible.

4.In accordance with the Court of Appeal in Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at §19:

“(1) The applicant on his own motion applied to the Court to withdraw his application for leave to apply for judicial review. The Judge acceded to his application, whereupon there was nothing outstanding in the action. The Judge was correct to conclude the action by ordering a dismissal of the application instead of leaving the action at large.”

5.The applicants’ joint application is therefore dismissed.

Dated the 17^th day of August 2022

(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 Applicants: 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 Applicants on 17 August 2022 LP KD KL KS 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 17 August 2022 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 10796/18/3/248/I1178; USM 10797/18/3/249/I1179; USM 10798/18/3/250/I1180; USM 10799/18/3/251/I1181 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 1141/16 (Formerly RBCZ 2000945/14)(T7S110); QA T/C 1142/16 (Formerly RBCZ 2000946/14)(T7S110); QA T/C 1144/16 (Formerly RBCZ 10003/16)(T7S110); QA T/C 1145/16 (Formerly RBCZ 10844/16)(T7S110) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Office (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1

Cites 1 case

Cases cited in this judgment

Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi