Ervina Yuniar v. The Torture Claims Appeal Board

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 2484/2024 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 20 May 2026.

1. The applicant applies for withdrawal of the application for judicial review of the Board’s Decision. As such, the applicant’s application is devoid of merit.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCAL 2484/2024[2026] HKCFI 2849
Court
High Court CFI
Date20 May 2026
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL 2484/2024

[2026] HKCFI 2849

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2484 of 2024

BETWEEN

  Ervina Yuniar Applicant
  and  
  The Torture Claims Appeal Board 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 Applicant being absent in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung:

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.The applicant applies for withdrawal of the application for judicial review of the Board’s Decision. As such, the applicant’s application is devoid of merit.

2.There being no evidence that the application is made other than out of the applicant’s free will; and there being no outstanding matter in this action, the Court accedes to the applicant’s request and dismisses the application accordingly[1].

Dated the 20th day of May 2026

  (Allen LEE)
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 20/5/2026

Ervina Yuniar

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 20/5/2026

Torture Claims Appeal Board
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 23201


Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: RBCL/1773/23


Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2)



Form CALL-1



[1] Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at §19:

“(1)     The applicant on his own motion applied to the Court to withdraw his application for leave to apply for judicial review.  The Judge acceded to his application, whereupon there was nothing outstanding in the action.  The Judge was correct to conclude the action by ordering a dismissal of the application instead of leaving the action at large.”