GAID SAFAA MELAD HENNAWY AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

GAID SAFAA MELAD HENNAWY AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicants failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's detailed decision; the Board's findings that risks were localized, of low intensity or frequency, that state protection and internal relocation were reasonable, and that asserted harm did not meet required severity were rational and supported by evidence, so there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 3727
Parties
1st Applicant: Gaid Safaa Melad Hennawy; 2nd Applicant: Anton Michael Mohsen Nabih Elkomos; 3rd Applicant: Elkomos Anton Selvia Mohsen Nabih; 4th Applicant: Elkomos Anton Yassa Mohsen Nabih; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 August 2025
Case Number
HCAL1268/2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application Challenging Non Refoulement Decision / Leave Application Refused/dismissed
Outcome
The 1st to 4th Applicants' application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life), Article 3 HKBOR (torture and Ill Treatment), Persecution Under Refugee Convention Article 33, Female Genital Mutilation, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave Test, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life) Article 3 HKBOR (torture and Ill Treatment) +5 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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gaid Safaa Melad Hennawy

1st Applicant

Anton Michael Mohsen Nabih Elkomos

2nd Applicant

Elkomos Anton Selvia Mohsen Nabih

3rd Applicant

Elkomos Anton Yassa Mohsen Nabih

4th Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application Challenging Non Refoulement Decision / Leave Application Refused/dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants have an arguable ground of judicial review against the Board's refusal of non-refoulement protection
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law, acted irrationally, or breached procedural fairness in its assessment of risk
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available in Egypt

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicants failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's detailed decision; the Board's findings that risks were localized, of low intensity or frequency, that state protection and internal relocation were reasonable, and that asserted harm did not meet required severity were rational and supported by evidence, so there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

The 1st to 4th Applicants' application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed

Orders

  • The 1st to 4th Applicants' application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed.