Case Details

Citation

FAISAL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION, HCAL 1903/2023

Case Number

HCAL 1903/2023

Court

Court of First Instance

(CFI)

Decision Date

29 April 2024

Parties

Applicant(s):

FAISAL MUHAMMAD 1st Applicant FAISAL SADIA 2nd Applicant ALI TALHA 3rd Applicant ALI TAHIR 4th Applicant NOOR AMINA 5th Applicant ALI TAHA, FAISAL MUHAMMAD, FAISAL SADIA, ALI TALHA, ALI TAHIR, NOOR AMINA, ALI TAHA

Respondent(s):

DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

FAISAL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

[2024] HKCFI 889

Court of First Instance29 April 2024

HCAL1903/2023 FAISAL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

HCAL 1903/2023

[2024] HKCFI 889

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1903 of 2023

BETWEEN
	FAISAL MUHAMMAD	1^st Applicant
	FAISAL SADIA	2^nd Applicant
	ALI TALHA	3^rd Applicant
	ALI TAHIR	4^th Applicant
	NOOR AMINA	5^th Applicant
	ALI TAHA	6^th Applicant
	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 submission by the counsel for the 1st to 6th applicants and the senior government counsel and the government counsel for the putative respondent in court;

Order by The Honourable Mr Justice Coleman :

1. I refer to the oral application for leave to apply for judicial review, which I heard on 22 March 2024. The application proceeded on the basis of the proposed five Grounds of review identified in the Amended Form 86.

2. At the end of the hearing, I reserved my decision.

3. Having further considered the materials, I have reached the view that Grounds 1, 2 and 3 are sufficiently arguable to warrant the grant of leave to apply for judicial review. However, Grounds 4 and 5 do not meet the arguability threshold, and leave on those Grounds is refused.

4. The parties should liaise with each other to bring the matter onto a substantive hearing as soon as possible, and are referred to PD 26.1.Amongst other things, the parties should provide their available dates for a hearing, so that the substantive hearing date can be fixed quickly.

5. Liberty to apply.

Observations:

Dated the 29^th day of April 2024.

(Alvin KWOK)
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 29/4/2024 Messrs. Y. W. Mok & Co. Solicitors for the Applicants Ref.: NM-JR-0001-23 (K)		Sent/Handed to the Respondent/the Respondent’s solicitors / such interested parties as may be directed by the Court / the interested parties’ solicitors on 29/4/2024 Department of Justice For the Putative Respondent Ref.: HCAL 1903/2023

FAISAL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION

Citation

Court

Procedural posture

Issues

Holdings

Legal principles

Disposition