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

AHMED NAEEM 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 failed to show exceptional circumstances to challenge the Director's decision and had no reasonable prospect of success against the Board's decision: the Adjudicator accepted the applicant's factual account but correctly found the disputes were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 457
Parties
Applicant: Ahmed Naeem; 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
27 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL1620/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review refused and dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Convention, Relocation (internal Protection), Credibility Assessment, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Torture Convention Relocation (internal Protection) +3 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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Naeem

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant may judicially review the Director's decision absent exceptional circumstances
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law in assessing risk of torture, CIDTP or persecution under the Refugee Convention
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Pakistan was a viable alternative

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show exceptional circumstances to challenge the Director's decision and had no reasonable prospect of success against the Board's decision: the Adjudicator accepted the applicant's factual account but correctly found the disputes were private, there was no state involvement to attract torture or persecution thresholds, internal relocation and state protection in Pakistan were available, and the procedural fairness complaints were unsupported.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review refused and dismissed

Orders

  • Leave refused; application dismissed