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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant could not show any reasonable prospect of success: the Board and Director made adverse credibility findings and concluded the claim was unsubstantiated, with state protection and internal relocation available, matters which the court will not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1101
Parties
Applicant: Ahmad Sarfaraz; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL1698/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Before Court of First Instance; Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture, Right to Life (bor 2), Prohibition of CIDTP (bor 3), Credibility and Primary Fact Finding, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave Threshold
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture Right to Life (bor 2) +4 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmad Sarfaraz

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Before Court of First Instance; Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has a reasonable prospect of success for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Director and the Board correctly assessed risks of torture, CIDTP, threat to life and persecution
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant could not show any reasonable prospect of success: the Board and Director made adverse credibility findings and concluded the claim was unsubstantiated, with state protection and internal relocation available, matters which the court will not ordinarily overturn on leave application.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed