ABBAS MD ARSHAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ABBAS MD ARSHAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The Board lawfully exercised its s.37ZT discretion to refuse late filing because the applicant was seven days late, offered no explanation or special circumstances, and the appeal lacked merit given the Director's reasoned findings that there were no substantial grounds for non-refoulement and reasonable internal relocation existed; accordingly there was no arguable basis for judicial review and leave was dismissed, also at the applicant's request to close the application.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 414
Parties
Applicant: Abbas Md Arshad; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 February 2021
Case Number
HCAL1648/2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; application closed at applicant's request.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Refugee Convention Article 33, Leave for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Immigration Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Refugee Convention Article 33 Leave for Judicial Review +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abbas Md Arshad

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 (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board lawfully exercised its discretion under s.37ZT to refuse late filing of notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant established a real and substantial non-refoulement/torture risk
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within India was a reasonable alternative

Ratio Decidendi

The Board lawfully exercised its s.37ZT discretion to refuse late filing because the applicant was seven days late, offered no explanation or special circumstances, and the appeal lacked merit given the Director's reasoned findings that there were no substantial grounds for non-refoulement and reasonable internal relocation existed; accordingly there was no arguable basis for judicial review and leave was dismissed, also at the applicant's request to close the application.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; application closed at applicant's request.

Orders

  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.