Baterna Edelyn Mae Gunsi and Another v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
|
HCAL 2343/2023 [2026] HKCFI 5706 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2343 of 2023 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 Applicants: Introduction 1.This is the Applicants’ application by Form 86 filed on 27 December 2023 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 13 December 2023 (the “Decision”) dismissing their appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing their application for non-refoulement protection. The 1st Applicant is the mother of the 2nd Applicant and represents him in this leave application. 2.On 21 September 2026, the Court received a letter from the Applicants through the Immigration Department applying to withdraw their leave application (the “withdrawal application”) asserting (i) that they want to withdraw their leave application; (ii) that they want to return to their home country; and (iii) that it is now safe for them to return. Reading the decision of the Board and all the papers, there is nothing to suggest that the decision to withdraw their leave application was made by the 1st Applicant otherwise than out of her own free will with full understanding of the consequences of the withdrawal and that it is safe for them to return to their home country. This Court is therefore satisfied that the decision to withdraw is an informed and conscious decision freely made. Accordingly, their withdrawal application is allowed and their application for leave to apply for judicial review is withdrawn.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