|
BETWEEN
|
| |
Misda Leni |
Applicant |
| |
and |
|
| |
Torture Claims Appeal Board/ |
Putative |
| |
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office |
Respondent |
| |
and |
|
| |
Director of Immigration |
Putative |
| |
|
Interested Party |
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 (Non-Refoulement Claims) Calvin Cheuk:
1. Form 86 be amended in accordance with [5] of the Form Call-1.
2. The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
1. By a Form 86 filed on 8 June 2022 (the “Form 86”), the Applicant applied for leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Director of Immigration (the “DOI”) dated 11 May 2022.
2. Subsequently, the Applicant appealed against the decision of the DOI on 20 May 2022 to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “TCAB”). On 17 February 2023, the TCAB dismissed the Applicant’s appeal and affirmed the decision of the DOI.
3. Procedurally, the Applicant should have filed another Form 86 to challenge the TCAB’s decision dated 17 February 2023.
4. At the hearing held on 6 February 2026, however, the Applicant asked for leave to withdraw her application.
5. In these circumstances, having regard to the need for procedural economy and expediency, I would treat the present application as an application for leave to apply for judicial review against the TCAB’s decision dated 17 February 2023, which affirmed the DOI’s decision dated 11 May 2022. I also amend the Form 86 to name the TCAB as the putative respondent and the DOI as the putative interested party.
6. There is no indication that the application for withdrawal was made other than of the Applicant’s own free will. Further, there is nothing outstanding in these proceedings. The application is therefore dismissed. See Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471, at [19(1)].
Dated the 3rd day of March 2026
| |
(Gladys Lee)
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 the Applicant’s 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 to the Applicant
on 03/03/2026
Misda Leni
Applicant’s ref. no:
Nil. |
|
Sent to the Putative Respondent / the Putative Respondent’s solicitors / such Putative Interested Parties as may be directed by the Court / the Putative Interested Parties’ solicitors on 03/03/2026
Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
USM 20310
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
QA T/C 50/22 (Formerly RBCZ 5000462/21)
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1