MD AWLAD HOSSAIN v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]
HTML content
HCAL 2209/2019
[2025] HKCFI 3312
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2209 of 2019
| BETWEEN | ||
| Md Awlad Hossain | Applicant | |
| and | ||
| Director of Immigration | Putative Respondent |
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;
Order by Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung:
1. The Court’s Order dated 17 February 2024 be set aside; and
2. Leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
1. By an Order dated 17 December 2024 (“the Court’s Order”), the Court granted leave to the applicant to apply for judicial review of the Director’s Decision, which refused to re-open his claim. Up to date, the applicant has not filed an originating summons for his application for judicial review of the Director’s Decision.
2. The applicant now applies for withdrawal of the application for judicial review of the Director’s Decision. In his letter to the Immigration Department, he said that all his problems in his country had been resolved and he wanted to return to his home country.
3. In the circumstances, by virtue of Order 32, rule 6 of the Rules of the High Court, I set aside the Court’s Order.[1]
4. There being no evidence that the application is made other than out of the applicant’s free will; and there being no outstanding matter in this action, the Court accedes to the applicant’s request and dismisses the application accordingly[2].
Dated the 2nd day of September 2025
| (M.O. WONG)(Ms) 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
| Notesfor 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 2/9/2025 Md Awlad Hossain 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 2/9/2025 Director of Immigration Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: L/M (19787) in ImmD RA 7/37/C (Formerly RBCZ 523/14, RBCZ 9002563/17) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1
[1]Order made ex parte may be set aside (O. 32, r. 6)
The Court may set aside an order made ex parte.
[2]Re Manik Md Mahamudun Nabi[2022] HKCA 471 at §19:
“(1) The applicant on his own motion applied to the Court to withdraw his application for leave to apply for judicial review. The Judge acceded to his application, whereupon there was nothing outstanding in the action. The Judge was correct to conclude the action by ordering a dismissal of the application instead of leaving the action at large.”