PAGLINGAYEN EMMANUEL JUSTIN RINGOR, a minor by his mother and next friend PAGLINGAYEN ROSALYN RINGOR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

PAGLINGAYEN EMMANUEL JUSTIN RINGOR, a minor by his mother and next friend PAGLINGAYEN ROSALYN RINGOR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director’s or Board’s decisions; the Board’s factual findings after oral evidence were rational and supported by COI showing state protection and feasible internal relocation, and the absence of legal representation for the minor was an irregularity that did not prejudice the substance of the decision.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 2298
Parties
Applicant (minor): Paglingayen Emmanuel Justin Ringor; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 July 2022
Case Number
HCAL1158/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture) / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Leave, Minor Specific Protection
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Procedural Fairness +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paglingayen Emmanuel Justin Ringor

Applicant (minor)

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture) / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was any arguable error of law or procedural unfairness in the Director’s or Board’s decisions
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced real risk of harm such that non-refoulement protection was required
  3. 3 Whether state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director’s or Board’s decisions; the Board’s factual findings after oral evidence were rational and supported by COI showing state protection and feasible internal relocation, and the absence of legal representation for the minor was an irregularity that did not prejudice the substance of the decision.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.