Mohamed Hasam Nirmala Ghouse v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 2435/2019[2025] HKCFI 3100

Court

High Court CFI

Date21 Jul 2025

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 2435/2019

[2025] HKCFI 3100

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2435 of 2019

BETWEEN
	Mohamed Hasam Nirmala Ghouse	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 oral submissions by the Applicant in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge To:

1. The Court declines jurisdiction of the application to withdraw; and

2. The Court makes no order on the application to withdraw.

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 22 August 2019 for leave to apply for judicial review (the “leave application”) of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board”) dismissing his appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing his application for non-refoulement protection (the “Decision”). His application was heard on 10 March 2025 and refused on 15 April 2025. Copies of the Form CALL-1 and Order were sent to him by post on the same day.

Discussion and conclusion

2.On 27 May 2025, the Applicant applied by letter to withdraw his leave application (the “withdrawal application”) asserting (i) that he wished to close his case because he wants to go back to his home country; (ii) that “ [his] life now can save” and “all [his] problem in finish”. As his leave application had already been adjudicated and refused, this Court has no jurisdiction to re-open it and allow it to be withdrawn. Accordingly, this Court declines jurisdiction and makes no order on the Applicant’s application to withdraw.

Dated the 21^st day of July 2025

	( Seline Sze )
	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 21/07/2025 Mohamed Hasam Nirmala Ghouse 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 21/07/2025 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 12098/18/6/277/S258 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: RBCZ 10048/18 Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCAL 2435/2019

Mohamed Hasam Nirmala Ghouse v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

High Court CFI

15 Apr 2025