Abhishek Kumar v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Case No.HCAL 2495/2020[2026] HKCFI 590

Court

High Court CFI

Date29 Jan 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 2495/2020

[2026] HKCFI 590

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2495 of 2020

BETWEEN
	Abhishek Kumar	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:

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused.

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 24 December 2020 for leave to apply for judicial review (the “leave application”) of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Petitions Office (the “Board”) dated 13 November 2020 (the “Decision”) dismissing his appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration in his Notice of Decision refusing his claim for non‑refoulement protection (the “Notice”).

2.Enquiry from the Board revealed that the Board had not made any decision dated 13 November 2020 relating to the Applicant’s appeal against the decision of the Director. From the documents disclosed by the Board, the Court is satisfied that the Applicant filed a Notice of Appeal dated 2 May 2017 (the “NOA”) against the decision of the Director in his Notice. However, by his letter dated 16 January 2019 he applied to withdraw his appeal. After clarification from the Applicant and the Duty Lawyer Service and after satisfying itself that the Applicant’s application to withdraw was made voluntarily with understanding of the consequence of the withdrawal, the Board wrote to the Applicant on 29 January 2019 confirming his withdrawal of the NOA. Thus, as a matter of fact, the Board had not made any decision dated 13 November 2020 or otherwise relating to the Applicant. The subject matter of the intended judicial review does not exist.

3.By the time this leave application came to be processed, the Applicant had been removed and returned to his home country on 6 September 2023. In the circumstances, his leave application is dismissed for want of subject matter for review.

4.Having considered the nature of the application and issues raised, the Decision, the papers, the applicable legal principles and all the circumstances, the Court considered that the leave application may be justly determined on paper without an oral hearing. Hence, the Court proceeded to determine this leave application on paper and refused it.

Dated the 29^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 29/01/2026 Abhishek Kumar Applicant’s ref. no:		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 29/01/2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 7029/17/5/35/IN1358 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 1690/08 (Formerly RBCZ 1276/08) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

Form CALL-1