RE BATAC RESTY LAGMAN

[2025] HKCA 307 Court of Appeal 8 April 2025 • CACV504/2024 • 12 min read

6 cases cited (0 HK, 6 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal allowed

The appeal is allowed.

Source: [2025] HKCA 307, Court of Appeal, decided 8 April 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Judges (2)

Barnes Coram Chu Coram

Parties (1)

Batac Resty Lagman Applicant

Case Significance

In Re Batac Resty Lagman [2025] HKCA 307, the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in a non-refoulement matter, engaging the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance, s 8, and the Immigration Ordinance. The court held that 'The appeal is allowed,' following the earlier proceedings in Batac Resty Lagman v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office [2024] HKCFI 3022 before the Court of First Instance.

Summary

Batac Resty Lagman, a Filipino national, appealed the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's refusal to allow late filing of his notice of appeal against the rejection of his non-refoulement claim on BOR 2 risk grounds. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

What did the Court of Appeal decide in Re Batac Resty Lagman [2025] HKCA 307?

The Court of Appeal held that 'The appeal is allowed,' in a matter that had earlier been before the Court of First Instance in Batac Resty Lagman v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office [2024] HKCFI 3022.

What ordinances were engaged in Re Batac Resty Lagman [2025] HKCA 307?

The appeal engaged section 8 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance and the Immigration Ordinance, in the context of a non-refoulement protection claim before the Court of Appeal.