Nguyen Thi Lan Phuong and Another v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 1931/2019[2023] HKCFI 2291

Court

High Court CFI

Date12 Sep 2023

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 1931/2019

[2023] HKCFI 2291

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. HCAL 1931 of 2019

BETWEEN
	Nguyen Thi Lan Phuong	1^st Applicant
	Luong Ngoc Anh	2^nd 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 documents only; or

consideration of documents and Applicant being absent in open court;

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

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.

1.The 1^st applicant is the mother of the 2^nd applicant, a minor.

2.The applicants remain in Hong Kong without permission of the Director of Immigration. They lodged non-refoulement claims with the Immigration Department and were rejected by the Director of Immigration. They appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “Board”). The Board dismissed their appeals.

3.The applicants filed Form 86 on 9 July 2019 for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

4.The 1^st applicant filed an affirmation dated 13 June 2023, in which she said she wants to withdraw her leave application as it is safe for her to return to her country. The 1^st applicant made this affirmation on behalf of her daughter. There is nothing outstanding in this action.

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 leave application is therefore dismissed.

Dated the 12^th day of September 2023

(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 12/9/2023 Nguyen Thi Lan Phuong and Luong Ngoc Anh Applicants’ 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 12/9/2023 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 7132/17/5/138/V1330; USM 14654/18/12/11/V2229 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 4568/18 (Formerly RBCZ 10763/18); QA T/C 537/17 (Formerly RBCZ 13979/15) 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