Ugwu Ifeanyi Ikechukwu v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 3697/2019[2025] HKCFI 1594

Court

High Court CFI

Date24 Apr 2025

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 3697/2019

[2025] HKCFI 1594

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 3697 of 2019

BETWEEN
	Ugwu Ifeanyi Ikechukwu	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 the Applicant being absent in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge (Non-refoulement Claims) Philips Wong:

The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.By Form 86 filed on 11 December 2019, the Applicant applied for leave to apply for judicial review (the “Leave Application”) against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office dated 5 November 2019.

2.The Applicant requested an oral hearing for the application. The hearing took place on 6 March 2025. Notice of Hearing was issued to the Applicant in advance. The Applicant was reminded to attend the hearing by phone on 4 March 2025 and he confirmed he could attend. Despite that, the Applicant did not attend the hearing.

3.On 7 April 2025, the Court received an ex parte application by the Applicant by way of an affidavit sworn on 6 March 2025. In the said affidavit, the Applicant stated that he wanted to have his appeal case closed.

4.There is nothing to indicate that the Applicant did not make the application to withdraw the Leave Application out of his own free will. Accordingly, I accede to the Applicant’s request and dismiss the Leave Application (See Manik MD Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471, at §19).

Dated the 24^th day of April 2025.

(Alfred Chan)
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 24/4/2025 Ugwu Ifeanyi Ikechukwu 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 24/4/2025 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 14926/18/12/283/NI277 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 4178/18 (formerly RBCZ/ 14348/15) 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