Dao Van Tung v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 3052/2019[2022] HKCFI 2697

Court

High Court CFI

Date01 Sep 2022

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 3052/2019

[2022] HKCFI 2697

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 3052 OF 2019

BETWEEN
	Dao Van Tung	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 applicant is an illegal immigrant for staying without permission of the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). He lodged non-refoulement claim with the Immigration Department and was rejected by the Director. He appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “Board”) and, by the Board’s Decision, his appeal was dismissed by the Board.

2.The applicant filed Form 86 on 16 October 2019 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

3.The Court received a letter from the Director, informing the Court that the applicant had, by his letter dated 26 July 2022, applied to withdraw his application because his problems had been solved and he wanted to return to Vietnam as soon as possible.

4.The Court will treat the letter from the Director as the applicant’s application to the Court for withdrawal of his application.

5.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.”

6.The application is therefore dismissed.

Dated the 1^st day of September 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 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 1 September 2022 Dao Van Tung 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 1 September 2022 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 15826/19/4/84/V2277 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: ImmD/CR T/C 4963/18 (formerly RBCZ 109/18)[T1S126] 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