Hossain Mohammad Rahat v. Director of Immigration
Read the full judgment text of HCAL 70/2023 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 17 March 2023.
1. The applicant is an illegal immigrant by overstaying. He lodged non-refoulement claim with the Immigration Department and was rejected by the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). He appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “Board”) and, by the Board’s Decision, his appeal was dismissed. In his previous application HCAL 368 of 2017 (“previous claim”), he had made an application for judicial review of the Board’s Decision to the Court of First Instance. When failed, he appealed to
Cites 2 cases
|
HCAL 70/2023 [2023] HKCFI 690 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 70 of 2023
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3) Following;
Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung: The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed. Observations for the Applicant: 1.The applicant is an illegal immigrant by overstaying. He lodged non-refoulement claim with the Immigration Department and was rejected by the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). He appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “Board”) and, by the Board’s Decision, his appeal was dismissed. In his previous application HCAL 368 of 2017 (“previous claim”), he had made an application for judicial review of the Board’s Decision to the Court of First Instance. When failed, he appealed to the Court of Appeal and finally to the Court of Final Appeal. All his applications were dismissed. 2.He then made a subsequent claim with the Director. By Notice of Decision dated 28 November 2022 (“the Director’s Decision”), the Director rejected his application for subsequent claim. 3.The applicant filed Form 86 on 17 January 2023 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Director’s Decision. The Court considered that the applicant had abused the proceedings by relying on the same facts in the previous claim to make the subsequent claim and was minded to impose a restrictive proceedings order (“RPO”) on the applicant. The Court had fixed the hearing date on 15 February 2023 for the applicant to make submissions on whether RPO should be imposed on him. 4.Before the Court, the applicant applied to withdraw his application because he wants to go back to his country as it is safe for him to do so. 5.In accordance with the Court of Appeal in Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at §19:
6.The application is therefore dismissed. The applicant has been warned that RPO will be imposed on him. Dated the 17th day of March 2023.
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
Form CALL-1
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cases cited in this judgment