Ama v. Director of Immigration

Case No.HCAL 1621/2026[2026] HKCFI 5602

Court

High Court CFI

Date30 Sep 2026

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCAL 1621/2026

[2026] HKCFI 5602

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST NO. 1621 of 2026

BETWEEN

	AMA (1^st Applicant) O/B IA (2^nd Applicant)	Applicants
	and
	DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION	Putative
		Respondent

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
    or counsel [                               ] in open court;

Order by The Honourable Madam Justice Au-Yeung:

Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.

Reasons as follows:

1.IA (“Father”) filed Form 86 on 21 September 2026, seeking leave to judicially review the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 16 September 2026 (“the Decision”), refusing the visa extension of AMA (“the Minor”).

2.The Minor is a 4 month old infant on visitor status. The Father sought extension of stay on visitor’s status on 28 August 2026. By the Decision contained in a letter dated 16 September 2026, the Director of Immigration refused the application and required the Minor to leave Hong Kong on or before 23 September 2026.

3.Form 86 has not followed the mandatory requirements of setting out the relief sought and the grounds for relief.

4.Nor had the affirmation of the Father. That affirmation only enclosed (i) the letter of the Director of Immigration containing the Decision; and (ii) the Father’s letter dated 16 September 2026 to the Director of Immigration, wherein he requested “an urgent humanitarian appeal” on behalf of the Minor. Item (ii) disclosed that the Minor had undergone a surgery and has a “locked-in specialist medical schedule” on various dates in this and next year. The Father only wanted a 1-2 month visa extension for the Minor. It was not even stated whether the “appeal” had been pursued or disposed of.

5.As the application failed to follow the mandatory requirements, I decline to grant leave to apply for judicial review.

Dated 30^th day of September 2026

(Ringo Tam)
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/Handed to the Applicant/ the Applicant’s solicitors on 30/9/2026 AMA (1^st Applicant) O/B IA (2^nd Applicant)		Sent/Handed to the Respondent/ the Respondent’s solicitors / such interested parties as may be directed by the Court / the interested parties’ solicitors on 30/9/2026 DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION Putative Respondent c/o Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit) 2 Department of Justice 6th Floor, Main and East Wing, Justice Place 18 Lower Albert Road, Central, Hong Kong

Form CALL-1

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