DEWI ANGGRAENI AND ANOTHER v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

DEWI ANGGRAENI AND ANOTHER v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The applicants failed to demonstrate a significant change in circumstances or any new material giving a realistic prospect of success under s.37ZO; the Director's and the Board's adverse credibility and fact findings were lawful and not Wednesbury-unreasonable; the minor's lack of representation was a procedural irregularity only; therefore leave to apply for judicial review is refused and a Restricted Proceedings Order is warranted to prevent abuse of process.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 2031
Parties
1st Applicant: Dewi Anggraeni; 2nd Applicant (minor): Dewi-Anggraeni Aisha; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 July 2022
Case Number
HCAL43/2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (subsequent Non Refoulement Claim) / Leave Application Considered on Paper; Leave Refused and Restricted Proceedings Order Made
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicants
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Subsequent Claim Under Section 37 ZO, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Restricted Proceedings Order, Abuse of Process, Child Representation
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Public Law Non Refoulement Subsequent Claim Under Section 37 ZO Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Restricted Proceedings Order +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dewi Anggraeni

1st Applicant

Dewi-Anggraeni Aisha

2nd Applicant (minor)

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (subsequent Non Refoulement Claim) / Leave Application Considered on Paper; Leave Refused and Restricted Proceedings Order Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director lawfully refused the subsequent non-refoulement claim under section 37ZO
  2. 2 Whether there has been a significant change in circumstances giving realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the lack of legal representation for the minor rendered the process unfair

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to demonstrate a significant change in circumstances or any new material giving a realistic prospect of success under s.37ZO; the Director's and the Board's adverse credibility and fact findings were lawful and not Wednesbury-unreasonable; the minor's lack of representation was a procedural irregularity only; therefore leave to apply for judicial review is refused and a Restricted Proceedings Order is warranted to prevent abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicants

Orders

  • Applicant prohibited from commencing or continuing proceedings relating to any non-refoulement claim in the High Court or appeals without leave of the Court of First Instance
  • All leave applications to be made to Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung or designated judge in his absence