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

Read the full judgment text of HCAL 2507/2020 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 10 July 2026.

1. By my decision dated 20 February 2026, I refused to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 10 October 2017 which refused the Applicant’s non-refoulement claim.

Case No.HCAL 2507/2020[2026] HKCFI 3733
Court
High Court CFI
Date10 Jul 2026
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCAL 2507/2020

[2026] HKCFI 3733

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

NO 2507 OF 2020

_____________

BETWEEN

Riasat Ali Applicant
and
Torture Claims Appeal Board/
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent
and
Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party

_____________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge (Non-Refoulement Claims) Vincent Lung in Chambers
Date of Decision: 10 July 2026

_____________

D E C I S I O N

_____________

The application

1.By my decision dated 20 February 2026, I refused to grant leave to the Applicant to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 10 October 2017 which refused the Applicant’s non-refoulement claim.

2.By a summons issued on 16 April 2026, the Applicant seeks an extension of time to appeal against my decision. As the 14-day appeal period under O.53, r.3(4) of the Rules of High Court expired on 6 March 2026, the Applicant is out of time in his intended appeal by more than a month.

3.By the Applicant’s letter to the Court received on 15 May 2026, the Applicant confirmed that he intended to withdraw the summons and the intended appeal. He stated that he was satisfied with my decision.

4.I accede to the withdrawal and accordingly dismiss the summons since there is now nothing left in these proceedings.

  (Vincent Lung)
  Deputy High Court Judge
  (Non-Refoulement Claims)

The applicant was unrepresented.