|
HCAL 1928/2020
[2025] HKCFI 4391
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1928 of 2020
|
BETWEEN
|
| |
Khan Javed |
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 (Non-Refoulement Claims) Martin Wong:
1. The Applicant’s Form 86 be amended to name the DOI as a putative interested party; and
2. Leave to withdraw the application for leave to apply for judicial review be granted; and
3. The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
Introduction
1. By a Form 86 filed on 25 September 2020 (the “Form 86”), the Applicant applied for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board (the “TCAB”) dated 10 September 2020 (the “TCAB Decision”) affirming the decision by the Director of Immigration (the “DOI”) dated 29 October 2018 refusing the Applicant’s non-refoulement protection claim. He named the TCAB as the proposed respondent and as an interested party.
2. I amended the Form 86 on my own motion to name the DOI as a putative interested party.
3. The Applicant requested for a hearing of this application and attended the same.
4. At the hearing I was informed by the Applicant that he has since obtained his HKID card and he wished to “close his case”. I was also provided with a copy of his HKID card.
5. There is nothing to indicate that the decision to, in effect, withdraw this application was made other than out of his own free will and there is nothing outstanding in this action, I therefore accede to the Applicant’s request and formally dismiss this application.
Dated the 25th day of September 2025
| |
(Cheung Ho Yat, Annson)
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 25 September 2025
Khan Javed
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 25 September 2025
Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
USM 14195/18/11/38/P2820
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
QA T/C 3732/18 (formerly RBCZ 14298/15)
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1
|