Nguyen Thi Ngoc v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 656/2021[2026] HKCFI 481

Court

High Court CFI

Date27 Jan 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 656/2021

[2026] HKCFI 481

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 656 of 2021

BETWEEN
	Nguyen Thi Ngoc	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 To:

1. Application to withdraw the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review (“Form 86”) be granted; and

2. Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be withdrawn.

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 10 May 2021 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”) dated 16 April 2021 (the “Decision”) dismissing her appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing her application for non-refoulement protection.

2.On 31 December 2025, the Court received a letter from the Applicant through the Immigration Department applying to withdraw her leave application (the “withdrawal application”) asserting (i) that she wants to go back to her home country; (ii) that her problem there has been solved; and (iii) she can safety return to her home country. Reading the decision of the Board and all the papers, there is nothing to suggest that her decision to withdraw was made otherwise than out of her own free will and with full understanding of the consequences of the withdrawal. This Court is therefore satisfied that her decision to withdraw her leave application is an informed and conscious decision freely made. Accordingly, her withdrawal application is allowed and her application for leave to apply for judicial review is withdrawn.

Dated the 27^th day of January 2026

( 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 27/01/2026 Nguyen Thi Ngoc 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 27/01/2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 17455/20/12/14/V2659 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 631/20 (Formerly RBCZ 10549/20) (T1I78) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1