RIAZ HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER v. PERMANENT SECRETARY FOR SECURITY

RIAZ HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER v. PERMANENT SECRETARY FOR SECURITY

The Permanent Secretary was not under a legal duty to have regard to the specific matters alleged by the applicants when deciding whether to suspend or rescind the deportation order under s20(1)(a) and ss54–55, he had considered the applicants' representations and was entitled to conclude that the seriousness of the offences and the public interest justified maintaining the life deportation order; the judicial review application was not reasonably arguable and is dismissed.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2532
Parties
1st Applicant: Riaz Hussain; 2nd Applicant: Wong Yuk Lan; Putative Respondent: Permanent Secretary for Security; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 October 2020
Case Number
HCAL62/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; application to amend Form 86 dismissed; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Deportation, Suspension and Rescission of Deportation Orders, Judicial Review, Relevant Considerations, Public Good, Proportionality
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Deportation Suspension and Rescission of Deportation Orders Judicial Review Relevant Considerations Public Good +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Riaz Hussain

1st Applicant

Wong Yuk Lan

2nd Applicant

Permanent Secretary for Security

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Permanent Secretary failed to take into account relevant considerations when refusing to suspend or rescind the deportation order (including seriousness of offences and rehabilitation)
  2. 2 Whether the Permanent Secretary failed to properly assess the element of public good
  3. 3 Whether a proportionality review applies to immigration decisions concerning persons with no right to enter or remain

Ratio Decidendi

The Permanent Secretary was not under a legal duty to have regard to the specific matters alleged by the applicants when deciding whether to suspend or rescind the deportation order under s20(1)(a) and ss54–55, he had considered the applicants' representations and was entitled to conclude that the seriousness of the offences and the public interest justified maintaining the life deportation order; the judicial review application was not reasonably arguable and is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; application to amend Form 86 dismissed; no order as to costs

Orders

  • Application to amend Form 86 dismissed
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed