GILL AMRIK SINGH AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

GILL AMRIK SINGH AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Two‑week unexplained delay and absence of any reasonably arguable grounds meant there was no good reason to extend time; on merits the Director and the Board gave legally sufficient, rational reasons including safe internal relocation and no reliable evidence of a real and substantial risk, so judicial review had no prospect of success; extension refused and application dismissed.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1511
Parties
1st Applicant: Amrik Singh Gill; 2nd Applicant: Prabhjot Kaur Gill; 3rd Applicant: Jaspreet Singh Gill; 4th Applicant: Keerat Singh Gill; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL296/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Leave (application Dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed and extension of time refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Review
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration and Asylum Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time Internal Relocation +2 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amrik Singh Gill

1st Applicant

Prabhjot Kaur Gill

2nd Applicant

Jaspreet Singh Gill

3rd Applicant

Keerat Singh Gill

4th Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Leave (application Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for filing an application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the intended judicial review had any reasonably arguable grounds or prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the decisions of the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board involved any legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality

Ratio Decidendi

Two‑week unexplained delay and absence of any reasonably arguable grounds meant there was no good reason to extend time; on merits the Director and the Board gave legally sufficient, rational reasons including safe internal relocation and no reliable evidence of a real and substantial risk, so judicial review had no prospect of success; extension refused and application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed and extension of time refused

Orders

  • Extension of time refused
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed