Omouwuigbe Ewemade v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 510/2021[2025] HKCFI 1075

Court

High Court CFI

Date15 Apr 2025

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 510/2021

[2025] HKCFI 1075

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 510 of 2021

BETWEEN
	Omouwuigbe Ewemade	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’s application for leave for judicial review of the Board’s Decision is dismissed for the reason that he has made an affidavit that his visa had been approved and that he needs to exit Hong Kong; and in the circumstances, his application will serve no practical purpose. See AW v. Director of Immigration and William Lam CACV 63 of 2015, Hon. Lam VP, Kwan and Poon JJA, 3 November 2015:

“67. It is well established that the court may exercise discretion not to grant a remedy on judicial review if it would serve no practical purpose, where it may have become otiose or pointless to grant a remedy because the relevant detriment to the applicant has been removed (De Smith’s Judicial Review (7th ed) at §§18-054 to 18-056; Judicial Review by Supperstone, Goudie and Walker (5th ed) at §18.18.1). …”

Dated the 15^th day of April 2025

(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 15/4/2025 Omouwuigbe Ewemade 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 15/4/2025 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 15778/19/4/36/NI297 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 74/19 (Formerly RBCZ 15/19) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1

Cites 1 case

Cases cited in this judgment

Aw v. Director of Immigration and Another