KOODALINGAM KOODALARASU AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

KOODALINGAM KOODALARASU AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because applicants failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions, which reasonably found low risk and viable internal relocation; hence no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 775
Parties
1st Applicant: Koodalingam Koodalarasu; 2nd Applicant: Marimuthu Kalaiyarasi; 3rd Applicant: Koodalingam Koodalarasu Lingana; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 March 2019
Case Number
HCAL560/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (decision on Application for Leave)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life), HKBOR Article 3 (prohibition of Torture and Cruel Treatment), Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Judicial Review Leave Test, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Family Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk +6 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Koodalingam Koodalarasu

1st Applicant

Marimuthu Kalaiyarasi

2nd Applicant

Koodalingam Koodalarasu Lingana

3rd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (decision on Application for Leave)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants have an arguable ground of legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions
  2. 2 Whether the Board and Director irrationally assessed credibility of applicants' evidence
  3. 3 Whether a real risk of torture, persecution or violation of HKBOR Articles 2 or 3 exists on return to India

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because applicants failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions, which reasonably found low risk and viable internal relocation; hence no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • No oral hearing was held for the leave application as no grounds were advanced