|
HCAL 622/2020
[2025] HKCFI 3427
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 622 of 2020
| BETWEEN |
|
|
|
Md Aslam |
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) YW Hew:
1. The Form 86 is amended on the Court’s own motion, naming only the Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office as the Putative Respondent;
2. Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
Introduction
1. The Applicant is a national of Bangladesh. By a Form 86 dated and filed on 14 April 2020 (“Form 86”), which was accompanied by a supporting Affirmation also dated and filed on 14 April 2020 (“the Affirmation”), the Applicant sought leave to commence a judicial review of a decision of the Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (“NRCPO”) made on 2 April 2020 (“the NRCPO BOR 2 Decision”)[1], which was the only document exhibited to the Affirmation.
2. I have therefore amended the Form 86 of my own motion to reflect the identity of the proper putative respondent.
3. The Applicant sought an oral hearing of his application. Before the oral hearing, he filed an affirmation (“the Withdrawal Affirmation”). The Withdrawal Affirmation was in English, but was interpreted to and affirmed by the Applicant with the assistance of a Bengali interpreter.
4. In the Withdrawal Affirmation, the Applicant affirmed that “Withdraw Judicial Review. I want to go back to my home country. All my problem now finished. Now my problem my mother is very sick as soon as possibleM(sic) I want to return to go home. Now I want to withdraw my case please help me.” and “Withdraw Judicial Review.”
5. Although the Applicant did not attend the scheduled oral hearing before me, there was before me no indication that the Withdrawal Affirmation was made other than out of his own accord, volition, and free will. I consider that the Withdrawal Affirmation amounted to, and I shall treat it as, an application by the Applicant to withdraw his application for leave for judicial review, including the various ancillary applications made within the Form 86[2].
6. I therefore accede to the Applicant’s request to withdraw his application for leave for judicial review without adjudicating on the merits thereof. As I do not consider that there is anything outstanding, and the action should not be left at large, I hence further order that the leave application be dismissed: see Re Manik MD Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471 at paragraph 19; Luu Van Hoc v Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [2023] HKCA 653 at paragraph 25; Ferrolino Jasmin Puno v Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [2023] HKCA 1073 at paragraph 16; Ngo Xuan Tuyen v Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [2024] HKCA 1140 at paragraphs 7 and 14; Re Nguyen Thi Lo [2023] HKCA 1141 at paragraph 11.
Dated the 11th day of August 2025
| |
(Edison Ho)
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 to the Applicant
on 11/08/2025
Md Aslam
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 11/08/2025
Torture Claims Appeal Board /
Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
BOR 38/17/1/15/B6
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
RBCZ/9001085/16 (formerly RBCZ/2009/08)
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2)
|
Form CALL-1
|