CACV 234/2024, [2025] HKCA 853

On appeal from [2024] HKCFI 1460

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 234 OF 2024

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL 588 OF 2019)

---------------------------

---------------------------

____________________

J U D G M E N T

____________________

Hon Barma JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1. This is an appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge To (“the Judge”) given on 28 May 2024 refusing leave to the applicants to apply for judicial review (“the Judge’s Decision”).

2. The intended judicial review was against the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/adjudicator of the Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (“the Board”) dated 22 February 2019 (“the Board’s Decision”) dismissing the applicants’ appeal against the decision of the Director of Immigration (“the Director”) dated 28 June 2018 (“the Director’s Decision”) rejecting the applicants’ non-refoulement claim. [1]

Immigration history and the lodgement of non-refoulment claims

3. The 1 ^st applicant, a national of the Philippines, last arrived in Hong Kong on 23 October 2016 for employment as a foreign domestic helper. However, she did not depart from Hong Kong upon the premature termination of her employment, and had overstayed since 15 July 2017.

4. Thereafter, the 1 ^st applicant gave birth to the 2 ^nd applicant in Hong Kong (out of wedlock) on 24 July 2017; the father of the latter being a man of African origins whom the 1 ^st applicant met while working in Hong Kong (“A2’s Father”).

5. On 28 July 2017, the 1 ^st applicant surrendered to the Immigration Department.

6. By written representations dated 2 August, 23 October and 13 December 2017, the 1 ^st applicant lodged her non-refoulement claim as well as the 2 ^nd applicant’s claim on his behalf.

7. The applicants were legally represented for the purpose of preparing and submitting their non-refoulement claim forms (dated 5 June 2018; “NCFs”) as well as their attendance at the screening interview with the Director on 22 June 2018 (Judge’s Decision, [6]).

Background to and evidence of the applicants’ claims and fears

8. The 1 ^st applicant was born in Roxas City in the Philippines. In 2009, the 1 ^st applicant married her husband (“Husband”), who resides in the Philippines and with whom she had 3 children. Husband was a sailor and/or casual worker and had no stable source of income.

9. The 1 ^st applicant was not politically affiliated to any such bodies nor was she connected to any gov