DHESSI KIRANJEET KAUR AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

DHESSI KIRANJEET KAUR AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the 3.5‑month delay was substantial with no satisfactory explanation, the applicants failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions, and the Board's findings that the risk was localized and that state protection and internal relocation were available meant there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2326
Parties
1st Applicant: Dhessi Kiranjeet Kaur; 2nd Applicant: Dhessi Gursahib Singh; 3rd Applicant: Dhessi Ekjot Kaur; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 September 2020
Case Number
HCAL780/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application; Application for Extension of Time; Extension Refused and Leave Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non‑refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Refugee Law Non‑refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Extension of Time +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dhessi Kiranjeet Kaur

1st Applicant

Dhessi Gursahib Singh

2nd Applicant

Dhessi Ekjot Kaur

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; Application for Extension of Time; Extension Refused and Leave Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time under Order 53 r4(1) of the High Court Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the applicants identified any arguable error of law or procedural unfairness by the Director or the Board
  3. 3 Whether the applicants face a real risk of torture or violation of BOR Articles 2 or 3

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the 3.5‑month delay was substantial with no satisfactory explanation, the applicants failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions, and the Board's findings that the risk was localized and that state protection and internal relocation were available meant there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review refused
  • Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed