BabelCite

Masih Mangta v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 3567/2019[2025] HKCFI 844
Court
High Court CFI
Date10 Mar 2025
Judge—
Case Document
100%

HCAL 3567/2019

[2025] HKCFI 844

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No 3567 of 2019

BETWEEN
  Masih Mangta 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 the documents only;            or
   consideration of the documents and oral submissions by the Applicant in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge (Non-refoulement Claims) Teresa Wu made on 5 February 2025:

(1)  Form 86 be amended to name only the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office and the Director of Immigration as the Putative Respondent and the Putative Interested Party respectively.

(2)  The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.By Form 86 filed on 2 December 2019, the Applicant applies for leave to apply for judicial review (“the Leave Application”) of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office dated 22 November 2019 (“the Board’s Decision”) confirming the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 10 July 2017, which rejected his non-refoulement claim on all applicable grounds under the Unified Screening Mechanism (USM).

2.The Applicant mistakenly referred the Immigration Department and the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office as one of the Putative Respondents and the Putative Interested Parties respectively. Accordingly, I have amended Form 86 on my own motion to correct them.

3.The material facts of this case, including the Applicant’s personal background and the facts alleged by him to show that he would be harmed or killed in India, and the immigration and procedural history, etc. have been set out comprehensively in the Board’s Decision[1].

4.At the oral hearing, the Applicant has expressed that he would like to withdraw the Leave Application, as his ‘problems’ are resolved and it would be ‘safe’ for him to return. He confirms that he has made such decision voluntarily, without threat, coercion or other inappropriate reasons, etc.

5.I accede to the Applicant’s request and make an order that the Leave Application herein be dismissed in these circumstances: see Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at §19.

Dated the 10th day of March 2025

  (Chung Lai Fan, Christine)
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 10 March 2025

Masih Mangta

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 10 March 2025

Torture Claims Appeal Board/
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
USM 7868/17/7/249/IN1501

Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
QA T/C 1184/17 (RBCZ 3001290/14)

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
[2022] HKCA 471 · Court of Appeal
01 Apr 2022
Full analysis