|
HCAL 3563/2019
[2025] HKCFI 845
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No 3563 of 2019
|
BETWEEN
|
| |
Le Thi Phuong |
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) Teresa Wu made on 4 February 2025:
(1) Form 86 be amended to name the Director of Immigration as the putative interested party.
(2) The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
1. By Form 86 (“Form 86”) filed on 2 December 2019, the Applicant applies for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office dated 22 November 2019 (“the Board’s Decision”) confirming the decision of the Director of Immigration dated 8 January 2018, which rejected her non-refoulement claim on all applicable grounds under the Unified Screening Mechanism (USM).
2. I have amended Form 86 on my own motion to correctly refer the Director of Immigration as the putative interested party.
3. The material facts of this case, including the Applicant’s personal background, her case and claim, including the incidents relied on by her to allege that she would be harmed or killed in Vietnam by her creditors, and the procedural and immigration history, etc. have been set out comprehensively in the Board’s Decision[1].
4. The Applicant is absent from the oral hearing. I have proceeded to consider the merits of her present application for leave to apply for judicial review: see Re Abdus Salam [2019] HKCA 1091. I am not satisfied that her intended challenge of the Board’s Decision is reasonably arguable with any realistic prospects of success at all: see Peter Po Fun Chan v Winnie Cheung & Another (2007) 10 HKCFAR 676. I note that she has failed to state her grounds for judicial review in Form 86 as required: see Ho Loy & Another v Director of Environmental Protection, HCAL 21/2015 (dated 22 December 2016) at §142. Other than exhibiting a copy of the Board’s Decision, the supporting affirmation contains absolutely no material of substance to discharge her duty to make full and frank disclosure in an ex parte application: see Re Leung Kwok Hung, HCAL 83/2012 (28 September 2012) at §35. In the premises, she has completely failed to demonstrate that the Board committed any errors of law or there was procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board’s Decision that the Court should intervene by way of judicial review.
5. For these reasons, I make an order that the application herein for leave be dismissed.
Dated the 10th day of March 2025
| |
(Chung Lai Fan, Christine)
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 10 March 2025
Le Thi Phuong
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 10 March 2025
Torture Claims Appeal Board/
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.:
USM 9954/18/1/227/V1947
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.:
QA T/C 3442/17 (formerly RBCZ13171/16)(T8I65)
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1
|