MEHMOOD FAISAL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]
HTML content
HCAL 1135/2021
[2026] HKCFI 1923
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 1135 of 2021
BETWEEN | ||
| Mehmood Faisal | Applicant | |
| and | ||
| Torture Claims Appeal Board/ | Putative | |
| Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office | 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;
| consideration of the documents only; or | |
| consideration of the documents and the Applicant being absent in open court; |
Order by Deputy High Court Judge (Non-Refoulement Claims) Lewis Law:
The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.
Observations for the Applicant:
1. By a Form 86 filed on 12 August 2021, the Applicant sought leave for judicial review against a decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (“the Board”) dated 3 August 2021 (“the Board’s Decision”), which was made upon the hearing of a petition/appeal from the Director of Immigration (“DI”)’s decision dated 21 November 2018. A copy of the Board’s Decision can be seen by the following hyperlink[1].
2. According to the Board’s Decision, the non-refoulement claim of the Applicant, a Pakistani, was based on a dispute between him and his girlfriend’s family members opposing to their relationship. The Board accepted the basic facts of the Applicant’s claim, but found no reliable evidence to show that the girlfriend’s family would harm/kill the Applicant if he were to return to Pakistan, he faced risk throughout Pakistan or that he suffered injuries up to the requisite severity. Moreover, based on country information, the Board assessed that the Applicant could have access to protection by the State. By these reasons, the petition/appeal was dismissed on all applicable grounds.
3. The Applicant has not set out any ground of judicial review. I have considered the Board’s Decision vigorously, but am unable to detect any reasonable argument that the decision was tainted by any illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety. In my view, the Board has conducted an anxious scrutiny of the facts of the case and assessed intensely its factual issues.
4. This application for leave to apply for judicial review is accordingly dismissed.
Dated the 8th day of April 2026
| (Klein Tse) 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 8 April 2026 Mehmood Faisal 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 8 April 2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 14679/18/12/36/P2930 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: QA T/C 4253/18 (formerly RBCZ 12011/16) (PSO) (T6S134) Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1
[1] https://legalref.judiciary.hk/doc/judg/html/vetted/other/en/2021/HCAL001135_2021_files/the_Board's_Decision.pdf