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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicants failed to show any realistic prospect of success: the Board lawfully and reasonably concluded there was no basis for real risk (no threats, speculative fear, father likely unaware of child), state protection and internal relocation were available, and the Board had adequately considered child-specific issues; no procedural unfairness or material error of law was established.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 748
Parties
1st Applicant: Yuyuk Yulika; 2nd Applicant: Shafiqul Wilson Islam Donawon; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 April 2024
Case Number
HCAL1229/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; joint application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp (article 3 Hkbor), Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor), Risk Assessment, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Findings, Child Specific Issues, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp (article 3 Hkbor) Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor) +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yuyuk Yulika

1st Applicant

Shafiqul Wilson Islam Donawon

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's Decision was procedurally unfair or failed to give reasons
  2. 2 Whether the Board failed to discharge its duty to consider child-specific issues for an unrepresented minor
  3. 3 Whether there were substantial grounds to believe applicants faced real risk under Article 2 or Article 3 HKBOR or persecution under Article 33 Refugee Convention

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicants failed to show any realistic prospect of success: the Board lawfully and reasonably concluded there was no basis for real risk (no threats, speculative fear, father likely unaware of child), state protection and internal relocation were available, and the Board had adequately considered child-specific issues; no procedural unfairness or material error of law was established.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; joint application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused
  • Joint application dismissed