Gurung Chanda v. Director of Immigration  HKCFI 1546; HCAL 352/2020
24 Jul 2023
The case concerned a Nepalese woman - the applicant, represented by Azan. The applicant first entered Hong Kong in 2014 on a Foreign Domestic Helper (FDH) visa, which was valid until 2020 after two extensions. Under the conditions of her visa, she was required to live with her employer. During her stay in Hong Kong, she married her husband and has lived with him in their matrimonial home since the end of her employment as an FDH.
The applicant made two unsuccessful applications to change her status to a dependent of her husband, prompting a third application. An Immigration Officer conducted separate interviews with the applicant and her husband and recommended that the application be refused. The Director of Immigration accepted the recommendation without specifying which eligibility criterion was not met.
The applicant thought the decision was unfair in law and unreasonable, and accordingly applied for judicial review. Azan cited three grounds of review, which are listed as below:
The Director misapplied, or misconstrued, the Dependant Policy in construing the requirement of showing a genuine relationship (“Policy Ground”).
The Decision was Wednesbury unreasonable (“Wednesbury Ground”).
The Decision is tainted by procedural impropriety and unfairness (“Unfairness Ground”).
After the hearing, the Court quashed the decision in these circumstances.
For the full judgement, please visit here.
To explore more about Azan, see his profile here.