ARTICUNA MARIBEL MARIBAO AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ARTICUNA MARIBEL MARIBAO AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the Applicants failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of localized risk and internal relocation were supported by reasons and evidence, and the minors' lack of legal representation did not reveal any missed minor-specific grounds; therefore judicial review was not justified.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4920
Parties
1st Applicant: Articuna Maribel Maribao; 2nd Applicant: Muhammad Fatima Qasim; 3rd Applicant: Muhammad Faizan; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 October 2025
Case Number
HCAL752/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Asylum, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Asylum Judicial Review Leave 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Articuna Maribel Maribao

1st Applicant

Muhammad Fatima Qasim

2nd Applicant

Muhammad Faizan

3rd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

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 there is a reasonably arguable ground of error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness to justify leave for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board and Director erred in assessing credibility of the primary applicant and risk of harm from a private land dispute
  3. 3 Whether the Board failed to give minors adequate consideration given lack of legal representation

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the Applicants failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of localized risk and internal relocation were supported by reasons and evidence, and the minors' lack of legal representation did not reveal any missed minor-specific grounds; therefore judicial review was not justified.

Court Disposition

Leave refused

Orders

  • Leave for the 1st to 3rd Applicants to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed