Khan Tarik v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 636/2020[2025] HKCFI 3029

Court

High Court CFI

Date16 Jul 2025

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 636/2020

[2025] HKCFI 3029

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 636 of 2020

BETWEEN
	KHAN TARIK	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) YW Hew:

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.The Applicant was a citizen of India. By a Form 86 dated 20 March 2020 but filed on 14 April 2020 (“Form 86”), accompanied by a supporting affirmation dated and filed on 14 April 2020 (“the Affirmation”), the Applicant sought leave to commence a judicial review in relation to a decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“TCAB”) dated 15 January 2020 (“the TCAB Decision”). The TCAB Decision was also a decision of the Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (“NRCPO”)

2.The Applicant did not seek an oral hearing of his application. I have hence dealt with such on paper.

3.No grounds for judicial review are set out in the Form 86 or the Affirmation, although the Applicant said in the latter that he did not agree with the decision of the TCAB and he did not want to go back as his life was in danger in India.

4.In any event, earlier this year the Department of Immigration informed the Court via correspondence that according to its available records, the Applicant passed away in January 2025.

5.In the circumstances it would be pointless to deal with the application. I accordingly dismiss the application.

Dated the 16^th day of July 2025

( Teresa Ng )
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 his 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 the 16^th day of July 2025 KHAN TARIK 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 the 16^th day of July 2025 Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 16435/19/10/84/IN3134 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 2466/18 (formerly as RBCZ 57/18) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1