Case Details

Citation

RUIZ CHERRY LOU FRIAS AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE, HCAL 2490/2019

Case Number

HCAL 2490/2019

Court

Court of First Instance

(CFI)

Decision Date

24 October 2025

Parties

Applicant(s):

Ruiz Cherry Lou Frias 1st Applicant Ruiz Kirsten Danielle, Ruiz Cherry Lou Frias, Ruiz Kirsten Danielle

Respondent(s):

Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

RUIZ CHERRY LOU FRIAS AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

[2025] HKCFI 5101

Court of First Instance24 October 2025

HCAL2490/2019 RUIZ CHERRY LOU FRIAS AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

HCAL 2490/2019

[2025] HKCFI 5101

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2490 of 2019

BETWEEN
	Ruiz Cherry Lou Frias	1^st Applicant
	Ruiz Kirsten Danielle	2^nd Applicant
	and
	Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office	Putative 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;

	consideration of documents only; or
	consideration of documents and 1^st Applicant being present and 2^nd Applicant being absent in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung:

1. Leave to 1^st Applicant to withdraw this application be granted; and

2. Leave to the 1^st Applicant to file another Form 86 to cover herself, her son and her daughter within 7 days from today be granted.

Observations for the Applicants:

1. The 1^st applicant appeared before this Court on 15 October 2025 to explain the proceedings in this action.

2. Having considered the explanations from the 1^st applicant, who is the mother of the 2^nd applicant, this Court will grant leave to the 1^st applicant to withdraw this action and file another Form 86 to cover herself, the 2^nd applicant and her other son Ruiz Daniel Jacob in the new Form 86. The reasons for me to do so are as follows:

a.  The 1^st applicant delegated the power to her friend to file Form 86 dated 27 August 2019 for application for leave for judicial review of the Board’s Decision dated May 09 2019. However, there is no such Board’s Decision on the file. Upon investigation, the Board’s Decision should be dated 6 June 2018, which dismissed the appeal of the 1^st applicant and her son Ruiz Daniel Jacob. This can be rectified by amending Form 86.

b.  The 1^st applicant, as the guardian, then lodged non-refoulement for her younger daughter, the 2^nd applicant in this action. The Director refused the daughter’s claim. The 1^st applicant then filed an appeal for her daughter with the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”). The Board dismissed her appeal by Decision dated 8 May 2020.

c.  The 1^st applicant applied to have her case and her children’s cases to be heard together. This is advisable for case management purpose.

d.  However, Form 86 dated 6 June 2018 cannot be amended as this was the date of filing of Form 86, which is not a mistake by itself. It cannot cover the Board’s Decision dated 8 May 2020, which post dated Form 86. The cause of action has not arisen on 6 June 2018.

3. Under the above circumstances, this action should be withdrawn and the 1^st applicant should issue another Form 86 to cover herself and her children.

4. I so ordered.

Dated the 24^th day of October 2025

(M.O. WONG)(Ms)
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 24/10/2025 Ruiz Cherry Lou Frias and Ruiz Kirsten Danielle 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 24/10/2025 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 15257/19/1/130/F989 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 4662/18 (formerly RBCZ/10832/18) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2)

RUIZ CHERRY LOU FRIAS AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Citation

Court

Procedural posture

Issues

Holdings

Legal principles

Disposition