Tamang Nima Dorje v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 1734/2019[2024] HKCFI 1564

Court

High Court CFI

Date27 Jun 2024

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 1734/2019

[2024] HKCFI 1564

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1734 of 2019

BETWEEN

	Tamang Nima Dorje	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.

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 24 June 2019 to apply for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.

3.By letter dated 3 June 2024, the Immigration Department informed the Court:

“According to our records, this applicant was removed on 15-03-2024.”

4.By virtue of section 37ZF (1) of the Ordinance, the applicant is deemed to have withdrawn his application.

“A torture claim (whether a claim pending final determination or a substantiated claim) made by a claimant who is subject or liable to removal must be treated as withdrawn if the claimant (for whatever reason) leaves Hong Kong.”

5.Other than this application, there is nothing outstanding in this action. This application should therefore be dismissed.

6.The application is therefore dismissed.

Dated the 27^th day of June 2024

	(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 Applicant: 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 Applicant on 27/6/2024 Tamang Nima Dorje Applicant’s 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 27/6/2024 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 13535/18/9/296/N545 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 2911/18 (formerly RBCZ 12094/16) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1