DINH KHAC DUOC v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]
HTML content
HCAL 776/2025
[2026] HKCFI 608
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 776 of 2025
BETWEEN | ||
| Dinh Khac Duoc | Applicant | |
| and | ||
| Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office | Putative 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 documents only; or | |
| consideration of documents and oral submissions by the Applicant in open court; |
Order by Deputy High Court Judge To:
1. Application to withdraw the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review (“Form 86”) be granted; and
2. Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be withdrawn.
Observations for the Applicant:
Introduction
1. This is the Applicant’s application by Form 86 filed on 28 March 2025 for leave to apply for judicial review (the “leave application”) of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office (the “Board”) and the Director of Immigration (the “Director”) dismissing his appeal against the decision of the Director refusing his application for non-refoulement protection (the “Decision”).
2. On 19 January 2026, the Applicant applied by affirmation to withdraw his leave application (the “withdrawal application”). In his affirmation, he asserted inter alia (i) that he made this withdrawal application out of his own free will; (ii) that he understands the consequences of the withdrawal, including that the Board’s decision which he sought to review will become final and binding on him; (iii) that it is now safe for him to return home and (iv) that he wants to return to his home country. Reading his affirmation, the decision of the Board and all the papers, this Court is of the view that his decision to withdraw the leave application is an informed and conscious decision validly made and hence allows his application for leave to apply for judicial review to be withdrawn.
Dated the 30th day of January 2026
| ( Seline Sze ) 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 30/01/2026 Dinh Khac Duoc 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 30/01/2026 Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent’s ref. no.: USM 25156 Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party’s ref. no.: Department of Justice, Senior Assistant Law Officer (Civil Law) (Civil Litigation Unit 2) |
Form CALL-1