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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because (1) the statutory appeals structure vests primary responsibility in the Board whose decision supersedes the Director's decision and absent exceptional circumstances the Director's decision is not susceptible to judicial review; and (2) the applicant failed to show any arguable basis or reasonable prospect of success, the Board having rejected the applicant's evidence as incredible and without error warranting review.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1558
Parties
Applicant: Abdul Basheer; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 June 2019
Case Number
HCAL1728/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, CIDTP, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply, Credibility Findings
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk CIDTP 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdul Basheer

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant may bring judicial review against the Director's decision once an appeal to the Board is pursued
  2. 2 Whether the Board's adverse credibility findings disclose reviewable error
  3. 3 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to permit judicial review of the Director's decision

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because (1) the statutory appeals structure vests primary responsibility in the Board whose decision supersedes the Director's decision and absent exceptional circumstances the Director's decision is not susceptible to judicial review; and (2) the applicant failed to show any arguable basis or reasonable prospect of success, the Board having rejected the applicant's evidence as incredible and without error warranting review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Refusal of leave to apply for judicial review
  • Application dismissed