Bui Van Thanh v. Torture Claims Appeal Board

Case No.CACV 661/2025[2026] HKCA 1704

Court

Court of Appeal

Date25 Sep 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%

CACV 661/2025, [2026] HKCA 1704

On Appeal From [2025] HKCFI 3835

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 661 OF 2025

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 778 OF 2020)

________________________

BETWEEN

	BUI VAN THANH	Applicant
	and
	TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD	Putative
		Respondent
	and
	DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION	Putative
		Interested Party

_____________________

Before:

Hon Poon CJHC and Ng J in Court

Date of Written Submissions:	28 April 2026
Date of Judgment:	25 September 2026

_____________________

J U D G M E N T

_____________________

The Court :

1.By a Judgment dated 11 February 2026, this Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the order of Deputy High Court Judge Michael Wong dated 26 August 2025, refusing him leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non-refoulement claims.

2.By a Notice of Motion dated 14 April 2026 filed together with his supporting affirmation, the applicant applied to us for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal under section 22(1) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap 484)[1] essentially on the ground that :

a.  The applicant will face the risk of being harmed or killed by his creditor if he is returned to Vietnam;

b.  Internal relocation as suggested by the Director is completely not feasible;

c.  It is possible for the creditor and gangsters to find out the applicant’s new residence because there is a nationwide social network of the gangsters and their clandestine connections with corrupt people in the government and police apparatus in his home country;

d.  The Director did not consider his human rights under the “Basic Law, Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Internation Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”; and

e.  The Judge reached his decision unfairly without allowing him to clarify his case and situation.

3.In his 6-page written submissions lodged on 28 April 2026, the applicant cited a number of cases and made generic submissions on the general principles of law relating to non-refoulement claims, but without advancing any submissions in relation to his claim or raising any challenges against our previous Judgment.

4.The Notice of Motion does not meet the statutory threshold for leave to be granted because it fails to (a) state any error in our judgment; (b) raise any viable ground of appeal that is reasonably arguable; or (c) identify any question of great general or public importance involved in the intended appeal; and there is no basis to grant leave to appeal on the “or otherwise” limb.

5.In consequence, we refuse to grant leave and dismiss the Notice of Motion.

(Jeremy Poon)
Chief Judge of the
High Court

(Peter Ng)
Judge of the Court of
First Instance

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person

[1] Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal in any civil cause or matter if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.

Summaries and metadata are generated from the judgment. Report an error

Cites 1 case

Cases cited in this judgment

Bui Van Thanh v. Torture Claims Appeal Board

[2025] HKCFI 3835 · High Court CFI

26 Aug 2025