|
HCAL 1307/2020
[2025] HKCFI 3468
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1307 of 2020
| BETWEEN |
|
|
|
Md Junayed Bepary |
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) Val Chow:
1. Form 86 be amended on the court’s own motion as follows:-
(i) the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office be named as the Putative Respondent
2. The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
Background
1. By a Form 86 filed on 26 June 2020, the applicant sought leave to apply for judicial review (“Leave Application”). The intended judicial review was against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / the Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (“Board”) dated 25 May 2020 (“Board’s Decision”) which affirmed decisions of the Director of Immigration (“Director”) respectively dated 21 June 2013 and 30 July 2018 rejecting the applicant’s non-refoulement claim. The Board’s Decision can be accessed through the following hyperlink: -
https://legalref.judiciary.hk/doc/judg/html/vetted/other/en/2020/HCAL001307_2020_files/the_Board's_Decision.pdf
2. In short, the basis of the applicant’s claim is that he fears harm if he is returned to Bangladesh because he was a member of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (“BNP”), the opposition party.
3. On the court’s own motion, the Form 86 is amended to correctly name the putative respondent.
4. The applicant recently filed an affirmation on 27 June 2025, applying for the withdrawal of the Leave Application. In the said affirmation, the applicant stated that he wishes to go back to his Bangladesh as soon as possible because all his problems have now “finished” and his mother is very sick. The Applicant did not appear at the hearing held on 23 July 2025.
5. In the circumstances, there is no reason for me to believe that his intended withdrawal is not out of his own free will.
6. In light of the applicant’s withdrawal application, the challenge against the Board’s Decision becomes moot. It is not necessary for me to adjudicate on the merits of the Leave Application, see: Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi [2022] HKCA 471; Ngo Xuan Tuyen v Torture Claims Appeal Board [2024] HKCA 1140.
7. Apart from the application to withdraw the Leave Application, there is nothing outstanding in this action. In the premises, I make an order that the Form be amended as described above and the Leave Application be dismissed.
Dated the 25thday 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 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 25/08/2025
Md Junayed Bepary
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 25/08/2025
Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 12767/18/8/37/B1439
TCAB 582/13/7/15/B218
Director of Immigration
Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 313/13
(formerly RBCZ/50/13)
QA T/C 2067/18 (formerly RBCZ 2002407/14)
Department of Justice,
Senior Assistant Law Officer
(Civil Law)
(Civil Litigation Unit 2)
|
Form CALL-1
|