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

AHMAD FAHEEM 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 the applicant has no reasonably arguable ground: the Director and the Board made findings supported by evidence and COI, there was no legal error or procedural unfairness, the risk was assessed as low with viable internal relocation, and the applicant failed to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1497
Parties
Applicant: Ahmad Faheem; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 June 2019
Case Number
HCAL801/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 3 HKBOR, Asylum/refugee Appeal, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave Stage
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 3 HKBOR Asylum/refugee Appeal +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmad Faheem

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is any reasonably arguable ground to judicially review the Director and Board decisions
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture, Article 3 ill‑treatment or persecution on return to Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether the decisions of the Director and the Board involved legal error or procedural unfairness

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant has no reasonably arguable ground: the Director and the Board made findings supported by evidence and COI, there was no legal error or procedural unfairness, the risk was assessed as low with viable internal relocation, and the applicant failed to produce or give oral evidence to support his claim.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.