MUNAWAROH SITI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

CACV 468/2025, [2026] HKCA 338

On appeal from [2025] HKCFI 2379

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 468 OF 2025

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO. 3087 OF 2019)

__________________________

__________________________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

The Court:

Introduction

1.  This is the applicant’s appeal against the judgment and the order of Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung (“the Judge”) dated 24 June 2025 (“the Judgment” and “the Order” respectively) refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (“the Board”) dated 6 September 2019 (“the Board’s Decision”).

The applicant’s claim and the Judge’s decision

2.  The applicant is a national of Indonesia. Her claim was put on the basis that, if refouled, she would be harmed or killed by her father and his creditors because she was unable to settle her father’s debt. The applicant’s non-refoulement claim was rejected by the Director dated 16 June 2017, and her appeal against the Director’s decision was rejected by the Board. A summary of the applicant’s background, her claim and her process before the Director and the Board can be found in the Judgment.

3.  The applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review was refused by the Judge and details of the Judge’s reasons for refusing to grant leave can be found in the Judgment.

The appeal

4.  By a notice of appeal filed on 4 July 2025, the applicant sought to appeal the Judge’s decision to this court. For the grounds of appeal, the applicant stated that “the High Court did not consider my JR. Adjudicator did not give me correct decision. His decision is full of wrong. Please grant my leave”.

5.  In the applicant’s skeleton argument lodged on 20 January 2026, she cited a case and a few articles but did not point out how the Judge erred in his decision.

6.  The appeal was heard on 24 February 2026. The applicant attended the hearing in person with the assistance of a Indonesian interpreter. The applicant added that she was married to a Hong Kong resident in 2024, and that they had four children together. Further, she has applied for dependent visa and has been waiting for the result for 1.5 years.

LEGAL PRINCIPLES

7.  In an appeal against refusal of leave to apply for judicial review in non-refoulement cases, the Court of Appeal would only examine the decision of the judge in light of the grounds advanced by the applicant. If no viable ground is put forward to reverse the judge’s decision, the appeal should be dismissed. The Court of Appeal’s role is not to examine the Board’s decision afresh as if it was a fresh application for judicial review (see Nupur Mst v Director of Immigration [2018] HKCA 524, at §14(6)).

8.  The assessment of evidence, country of origin information, risk of harm, state protection and viability of internal relocation are primarily within the province of the Board and the Director. The court below will not intervene by way of judicial review unless there are errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the decision of the Board: Re Kartini [2019] HKCA 1022.

DISCUSSION & DISPOSITION

9.  In the present case, no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the decision of the Board was detected by the Judge or was pointed out by the applicant apart from the bare assertions as stated in her grounds of appeal and in her skeleton argument.

10.  It is incumbent on the applicant to point out the Judge’s errors with sufficient particulars. In our view, the matters set out in the applicant’s notice of appeal and skeleton argument failed to identify any error on the part of the Judge. They do not constitute any viable grounds of appeal and lack substance. We see no basis to interfere with the Judge’s decision.

11.  For the above reasons, the applicant’s appeal is devoid of merits. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal