← Back to all casesEN
CACV477/2025
BHANDARI JAGDEVI HUSSNAYA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE
Case Details
Case ReferenceCACV477/2025
CourtCourt of Appeal of the High Court 高等法院(上訴法庭)
Date Published2026-03-17
LanguageEnglish
NCN[2026] HKCA 339
Claimant / ApplicantBHANDARI JAGDEVI HUSSNAYA
Defendant / RespondentTORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE
JudgesHon Poon CJHC, Ng J
Judgment Summary
Facts
- •Applicant is an Indian national claiming fear of harm over a land dispute.
- •Director of Immigration rejected the non-refoulement claim on 6 September 2018.
- •Torture Claims Appeal Board rejected the appeal on 4 October 2019.
- •Deputy High Court Judge refused leave for judicial review on 9 July 2025.
- •Applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal acting in person.
Issues
- •Whether the Judge erred in refusing leave for judicial review.
- •Whether the Board acted unreasonably or procedurally unfair regarding Country of Origin information.
- •Whether the Director failed to appreciate state acquiescence or protection issues.
- •Whether the applicant provided viable grounds to reverse the lower court's decision.
Outcome
- •Appeal dismissed.
- •No viable grounds identified to interfere with the Judge's decision.
- •Applicant's arguments deemed devoid of merits.
Implication
- •Court of Appeal will not examine Board decisions afresh on leave appeals.
- •Bare assertions without particulars are insufficient for appeal.
- •Assessment of evidence and risk remains primarily with the Board and Director.
- •Intervention requires demonstrated errors of law, procedural unfairness, or irrationality.
Laws & Authorities Cited
- §Nupur Mst v Director of Immigration [2018] HKCA 524
- §Re Kartini [2019] HKCA 1022