HCAL 1651/2019

[2024] HKCFI 1164

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1651 of 2019

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following;

	consideration of documents only; or
	consideration of documents and Applicant being absent in open court;

Leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused .

Observations for the Applicant:

THE APPLICATION

1. The applicant applies for leave to apply for judicial review of the Decision dated 14 March 2019 of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the Director’s Decision as described below (“the Board’s Decision”).

2. The applicant asked for a hearing. Pursuant to Order 53, rule 3(3) of the Rules of the High Court, hearing date of 10 April 2024 was fixed for him. However, he was absent.

3. Subsequently, the court updated the applicant’s address with the Immigration Department and discovered that the applicant had moved to a new address. Another notice of hearing dated 13 May 2024 was sent to this new address for the hearing on 12 June 2024. However, he was still absent on 12 June 2024. I shall deal with his application on paper.

4. Pursuant to Order 20, rule 8 and Order 53, rule 3(6) of the Rules of the High Court, Form 86 is amended to the effect that the proposed respondent is the Board and the Director of Immigration is the interested party.

The applicant

5. The applicant is a Filipino. He made a torture claim on 25 February 2010. Upon the commencement of the unified screening mechanism in March 2014, his torture claim was taken to be a non-refoulement claim and assessed on all applicable grounds, i.e. Torture risk; BOR 2 risk, Right to Life under Article 2 of the Bill of Rights Ordinance; BOR 3 risk under Article 3 of the Bill of Rights Ordinance and Persecution risk under the Refugee Convention.

The Director’s Decision

6. The applicant failed to submit his non-refoulement claim form (“NCF”) within time as directed by the Director. His application was therefore deemed to have been withdrawn on 17 February 2015.

7. The applicant applied to re-open his claim on 7 October 2016. He was directed to provide necessary information to support his application, but he failed to comply with such direction. On 15 February 2017, the Director rejected the applicant’s request to re-open his claim.

The Board’s Decision

8. The applicant appealed the Director’s decision to the Board on 28 September 2018. He explained that the appeal was made out of time because he lost his documents in February 2017 as his landlord had locked him out of his room after he failed to pay his rent [8].

9. The Board cons