Asghar Rehan v. Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 432/2021[2026] HKCFI 106

Court

High Court CFI

Date19 Jan 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 432/2021

[2026] HKCFI 106

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 432 of 2021

BETWEEN
	Asghar Rehan	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 (Non-refoulement Claims) Val Chow:

1. Form 86 be amended on the court’s own motion as follows:-

(i) the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office be named as the Putative Respondent

(ii) the Director of Immigration be named as the Putative Interested Party.

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

Observations for the Applicant:

Background

1.By a Form 86 filed on 26 March 2021, the applicant applied for leave to apply for judicial review (“Leave Application”). The intended judicial review was against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (“Board”) dated 28 June 2019 (“Board’s Decision”) which refused the late filing of a petition against a decision of the Director of Immigration (“Director”) dated 24 March 2017 rejecting the applicant’s non-refoulement claim.

2.As the Director should have been made an interested party and to ensure that the relevant parties are properly named, I make an order to amend the Form 86 accordingly on the court’s own motion.

3.By letter dated 4 December 2025, the Director informed the court that the applicant has passed away on 9 March 2025. Hence, the Leave Application is dealt with on paper.

4.In light of the applicant’s death, the challenge against the Board’s Decision becomes academic. Accordingly, I make an order that the Form 86 be amended as described above and the Leave Application be dismissed.

Dated the 19^th day of January 2026

( Edison Ho )
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 19/1/2026 Asghar Rehan 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 19/1/2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: BOR 674/17/5/174/P191 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: RBCL/9000795/17 (Formerly RBCZ 1548/09) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1