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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness; the Board's findings that there was no evidence of threats by the alleged persecutor and that internal relocation was viable were supported by evidence and not irrational, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 5057
Parties
Applicant: Ahmed Junad; 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
4 November 2025
Case Number
HCAL1064/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Judicial Review +1 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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Junad

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 Stage Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or committed procedural unfairness or reached an irrational decision
  2. 2 Whether applicant faces real risk of torture or death if returned to Pakistan (Immigration Ordinance Part VIIC; HKBOR s.8 Articles 2 and 3)
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation and state protection are viable alternatives

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness; the Board's findings that there was no evidence of threats by the alleged persecutor and that internal relocation was viable were supported by evidence and not irrational, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Applicant's application dismissed