ASTUTIK PUDJI V. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

[2025] HKCA 883 Court of Appeal 28 November 2025 • CACV405/2022 • 8 min read

4 cases cited (0 HK, 4 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

we dismiss the appeal.

Source: [2025] HKCA 883, Court of Appeal, decided 28 November 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Judges (2)

Barma Coram S T Poon Coram

Parties (3)

Director of Immigration Putative Interested Party Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office Putative Respondent Astutik Pudji Applicant

Case Significance

ASTUTIK PUDJI V. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [2025] HKCA 883 was a non-refoulement appeal engaging Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance section 8, the Immigration Ordinance, Legal Aid Ordinance section 15 and the Rules of the High Court. The Court of Appeal held that "we dismiss the appeal."

Summary

Astutik Pudji, an Indonesian national, appealed against Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung's refusal to extend time for her judicial review application and dismissal of her leave application challenging the Torture Claims Appeal Board's rejection of her non-refoulement claim. The claim included her daughter's protection claim. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

What did the Court of Appeal decide in Astutik Pudji v Torture Claims Appeal Board [2025] HKCA 883?

The Court of Appeal held "we dismiss the appeal," in a non-refoulement matter engaging Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance section 8, the Immigration Ordinance and Legal Aid Ordinance section 15.

Statutes Cited

Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap 383)

s 8

Immigration Ordinance (Cap 115)

Legal Aid Ordinance

s 15

Rules of the High Court (Cap 4A)

Cases Cited (4)

HK (4)

[2013] 1 HKC 526 [2018] HKCA 524 [2019] HKCA 1022 [2022] HKCFI 3074

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Hong Kong Courts portal.

Read on HKLII

Source: HKLII ([2025] HKCA 883)