|
HCAL 1997/2019
[2024] HKCFI 2081
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1997 of 2019
|
BETWEEN
|
| |
Karume Sandra Abdull |
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 present in open court; |
Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung:
Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
THE APPLICATION
1.The applicant is an illegal immigrant by staying in Hong Kong without permission and she lodged a non-refoulement claim with the Director of Immigration (“the Director”). The Director rejected her application and she appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). Having considered her evidence, the Board, by its Decision (“the Board’s Decision”), rejected her appeal and affirmed the Director’s Decision.
2.The applicant filed Form 86 on 15 July 2019 to apply for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.
3.The Court made an enquiry with the Immigration Department to update the applicant’s address.
4.The Court received a letter dated 2 August 2024, in which the Immigration Department informed the Court that the applicant was removed on 19 November 2019, which means she has already left Hong Kong.
5.Section 37ZF of the Ordinance provides, inter alia,
“Deemed withdrawal of torture claim on claimant’s departure
(1) 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final determination or a substantiated claim) made by a claimant who is subject or liable to removal must be treated as withdrawn if the claimant (for whatever reason) leaves Hong Kong.”
6.Other than this application, there is nothing outstanding in this action. This application should therefore be dismissed.
7.The application is therefore dismissed.
Dated the 29th day of August 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 29/8/2024
Karume Sandra Abdull
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 29/8/2024
Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
USM 12238/18/6/417/TA31
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
QA T/C 1690/18 (Formerly RBCZ 12393/15)
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1
|