Ibelegbu Victor Chibuenyim v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Read the full judgment text of HCAL 914/2022 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 2 January 2024.
1. The applicant is an illegal immigrant by staying in Hong Kong without permission and he lodged a non-refoulement claim with the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). The Director rejected his application and he appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). Having considered his evidence, the Board, by its Decision (“the Board’s Decision”), rejected his appeal and affirmed the Director’s Decision.
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 1 case
|
HCAL 914/2022 [2024] HKCFI 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 914 of 2022
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Following;
Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung: Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed. Observations for the Applicant: 1.The applicant is an illegal immigrant by staying in Hong Kong without permission and he lodged a non-refoulement claim with the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). The Director rejected his application and he appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). Having considered his evidence, the Board, by its Decision (“the Board’s Decision”), rejected his appeal and affirmed the Director’s Decision. 2.The applicant filed Form 86 on 13 September 2022 to apply for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision. 3.By affidavit filed on 25 September 2023, the applicant said that he wants to withdraw his application as he has obtained his dependent visa. 4.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:
6.The application is therefore dismissed. Dated the 2nd day of January 2024
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
Other judgments that cite this case