Doan Trung Kien v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 1349/2021 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 30 January 2024.

1. This is the Applicant’s application by summons filed on 4 January 2024 (the “Summons”) seeking extension of time to apply for leave to apply for judicial review (“leave application”) of a decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board”).

Cited by 1 case

Case No.HCAL 1349/2021[2024] HKCFI 279
Court
High Court CFI
Date30 Jan 2024
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL 1349/2021

[2024] HKCFI 279

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 1349 OF 2021

____________________

BETWEEN    
  Doan Trung Kien Applicant
  and  
  Torture Claims Appeal Board /
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent
  and  
  Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party

____________________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge To in Chambers
Date of Decision: 30 January 2024

________________________

DECISION

________________________

Introduction

1.This is the Applicant’s application by summons filed on 4 January 2024 (the “Summons”) seeking extension of time to apply for leave to apply for judicial review (“leave application”) of a decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board”).

2.The Applicant had previously made a leave application in respect of the Board’s decision on 27 September 2021.  That leave application was refused by this Court on 28 June 2022 (the “Court’s decision”).  A year and half later, he now seeks leave to make a second similar application out of time.  Presumably, he does not like the Court’s decision. The proper course he should have taken was to appeal the Court’s decision. Time to appeal has now lapsed.  He has advanced no grounds his summons or supporting affirmation in respect of the fresh leave application or any facts to support an appeal against the Court’s decision.  To make a fresh application again under the circumstances is a clear abuse of proceedings.  The application is therefore refused.

  (Anthony To)
Deputy High Court Judge

The applicant is not represented

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case