Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 665/2019

[2022] HKCFI 3045

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 665 OF 2019

BETWEEN
	Retrita Liziel Libang	Applicant
	and
	Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office	Putative
	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 remains in Hong Kong without permission of the Director of Immigration. She lodged non-refoulement claim with the Immigration Department and was rejected by the Director of Immigration. She appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “Board”). The Board dismissed her appeal.

2.The applicant filed Form 86 on 8 March 2019 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

3.On 19 July 2022, by Form CALL-1, the Court granted leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision by issuing an originating summons within 14 days from the date of the Order in accordance with Order 53, rule 5 of the RHC. However, the applicant is out of time to issue the originating summons. The Court has therefore, on 9 September 2022, issued an Order that unless the applicant complies with the Court’s Order of issuing the originating summons within 14 days from receiving the Court’s Order, her application is deemed to have been abandoned, the leave granted shall be set aside and her application be dismissed forthwith.

4.By a letter dated 7 September 2022 to the Court, the applicant applied to withdraw her application because her problems have been solved and it is safe for her to return to the Philippines.

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.I shall therefore make an order that Form CALL-1 dated 19 July 2022 be set aside and the application is dismissed.

Dated the 25^th day of October 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 25 October 2022 Retrita Liziel Libang 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 25 October 2022 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 9262/17/11/273/F482 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 2754/14 (T1S126)(Formerly RBCZ 2001005/14) 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 Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case

Retrita Liziel Libang v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

High Court CFI19 Jul 2022

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 665/2019

Retrita Liziel Libang v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

High Court CFI19 Jul 2022