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

Case No.HCAL 1446/2020[2026] HKCFI 82

Court

High Court CFI

Date29 Jan 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCAL 1446/2020

[2026] HKCFI 82

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1446 of 2020

BETWEEN
	SHAHROZ	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:

1. The Form 86 is amended on the Court’s own motion, naming only the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office as the Putative Respondent, and naming only the Director of Immigration as the Putative Interested Party;

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

Observations for the Applicant:

Introduction

1.The Applicant is a national of Pakistan. By a Form 86 filed on 10 July 2020 (“Form 86”), which was accompanied by a supporting Affirmation also filed on 10 July 2020 (“the Affirmation”), the Applicant sought leave to commence a judicial review of a decision dated 12 June 2020 which was one made by the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“TCAB”)/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (“NRCPO”) (“the TCAB Decision”)[1].

2.An oral hearing of the leave application was scheduled for 21 August 2025, which the Applicant failed to attend. However, he contacted my clerk on 25 August 2025 and claimed that he had not received the Notice of Hearing until 24 August 2025 as he thought someone might have taken his letter by mistake, and asked if he could be heard on another date. I hence directed that a hearing take place of the leave application on 28 August 2025.

3.At the hearing on 28 August 2025 the Applicant made some submissions in relation to the merits of his underlying non-refoulement claim. He had no objection to the amendments which I have made above to reflect the proper identities of the Putative Respondent and the Putative Interested Party.

4.Subsequently, the Court received on 25 November 2025 a letter of that date signed by the Applicant, which was addressed to me and specifically referred to HCAL 1446/2020 (“Letter”). In the Letter, the Applicant stated:

“I want to withdraw my application. My case No. HCAL-1446-2020 so I want to request to my honour Judge YW Hew High Court Judge. The problem in my already finish. The man who is my enemies is already die in car accident 1 month and 20 days before so I don’t have any problem in Pakistan any more so I want to back to my country Pakistan as soon as possible.”

5.There is no indication before me that the Applicant submitted the Letter and made his request other than out of his own free will and volition.

6.I therefore accede to the Applicant’s request to withdraw his application for leave for judicial review without adjudicating on the merits thereof, and make the orders above. I also order that the leave application should be dismissed as the action should not be left at large: see Re Manik MD Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at paragraph 19; Luu Van Hoc v Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [2023] HKCA 653 at paragraphs 25-26; Ferrolino Jasmin Puno v Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [2023] HKCA 1073 at paragraph 16.

Dated the 29^th day of January 2026

(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 29 January 2026 SHAHROZ 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 29 January 2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 14132/18/10/474/P2808 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 4270/18 (formerly RBCZ 11801/16) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)