Dauz Maria Veronica Fuyoc v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
|
HCAL 1272/2026 [2026] HKCFI 5703 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1272 of 2026 BETWEEN
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3) Following;
Order by Deputy High Court Judge To:
Observations for the Applicant: Introduction 1.This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 14 July 2026 for leave to apply for judicial review (the “leave application”) of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board”) dated 4 May 2026 (the “Decision”) dismissing her appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing her application for non-refoulement protection. 2.On 28 September 2026, the Court received a letter from the Applicant applying to withdraw her leave application (the “withdrawal application”) asserting (i) that “upon deep thinking [she] decided to accept the idea or (sic) relocating … because of my my life is no longer at high risk of danger in my country PHILIPPINES.” 3.Reading the decision of the Board, her letter and all the papers, it appears that she had seriously considered the Decision and accepted internal relocation is a feasible option to avoid her risk of harm, if necessary. There is also nothing in the papers to suggest that her decision to withdraw her leave application was made otherwise than out of her own free will with full understanding of the consequences of the withdrawal and that it is safe for her to return to her home country. This Court is therefore satisfied that her decision to withdraw is an informed and conscious decision freely made. Accordingly, her withdrawal application is allowed and her application for leave to apply for judicial review is withdrawn. Dated the 15th day of October 2026
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
Form CALL-1 |
Summaries and metadata are generated from the judgment. Report an error