Imran Muhammad v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

HCAL 2485/2018

[2023] HKCFI 299

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 2485 OF 2018

_____________

_____________

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

1.The applicant is an illegal immigration staying in Hong Kong without the permission of the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). His application for non-refoulement was refused and he appealed to The Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). By the Board’s Decision dated 16 October 2018 (“the Board’s Decision”), the Board dismissed his appeal. The applicant filed Form 86 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

2.His application was considered by this Court on paper. By Form CALL-1, this Court granted leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision and ordered the applicant to issue the originating summons in accordance with Order 53, rule 5 of the Rules of the High Court (“RHC”) within 14 days after the grant of the leave (“the Court’s Order”).

3.The Court’s Order was sent to the applicant at his last known address at Room A, 5/F, 200-210, Temple Street, Yau Ma Tai, Kowloon on 1 November 2022.

4.The applicant filed an affirmation dated 16 January 2023 for extension of time to appeal. He said he did not receive the Court’s Order.

5.My judicial clerk called the applicant on the phone and confirmed with him his address in Temple Street. He was advised to write to the Court to confirm his address. My judicial clerk then re-sent him a letter together with the Court’s Order on 8 November 2022 at the address confirmed by the applicant on the phone. The letter has never been returned by the Post Office.

6.The applicant did not acknowledge receipt of the Court’s Order. He issued a summons and an affirmation on 16 January 2023 for leave to appeal out of time. In this summons, the applicant said that he did not receive the Court’s Order.

7.In the circumstances, the Court now makes the Order in terms as follows:

1.  The applicant’s application is dismissed; and

2.  Unless the applicant issues an originating summons as required under Order 53, rule 5 of the Rules of High Court within 14 days from the date of this Order, the applicant is deemed to abandon his application, which is dismissed forthwith.

The applicant was unrepresented.