|
HCAL 98/2022
[2025] HKCFI 3387
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 98 of 2022
|
BETWEEN
|
| |
Bui Thi Dong |
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;
Order by Deputy High Court Judge To:
1. Application to withdraw the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review (“Form 86”) be granted; and
2. Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be withdrawn.
Observations for the Applicant:
Introduction
1. This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 27 January 2022 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”) dismissing his appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing his application for non-refoulement protection (the “Decision”).
Discussion and conclusion
2. To ensure that the withdrawal is valid and properly made, the Applicant was given directions by letter to file an affirmation or a statement confirming:
(a) that her withdrawal application is made out of her own free will;
(b) that she will be safe to return to her home country; and
(c) that she understands that if her withdrawal application is approved, the Decision of the Board dismissing her appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration refusing her application for non-refoulement protection remains in force.
3. In compliance with the directions, the Applicant filed a statement dated 21 July 2025 confirming the above. In view of the assertions in her statement, the Court is satisfied that the Applicant made the withdrawal application out of her own free will; that she understands if her withdrawal application is allowed, her leave application may be withdrawn; that the Decision of the Board will be final and binding on her; and that she may be refouled to her home country. Accordingly, the Court granted her leave to withdraw her leave application.
Dated the 6th day of August 2025
| |
( Seline Sze )
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 06/08/2025
Bui Thi Dong
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 06/08/2025
Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
USM 17716/21/3/35/V2786
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1
|