AI DODOH v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

AI DODOH v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The Director's decision to refuse the subsequent claim was lawful and not Wednesbury unreasonable because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances or credibility sufficient to give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; consequently leave to apply for judicial review...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2917
Parties
Applicant: Ai Dodoh; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 October 2021
Case Number
HCAL1223/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Decision Refusing Leave and Making Restricted Proceedings Order
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; Restricted Proceedings Order made against applicant
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Subsequent Claim Under Unified Screening Mechanism, Restricted Proceedings Order (rpo), Abuse of Process, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Judicial Review Leave Stage
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Constitutional and Administrative Law Public Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Subsequent Claim Under Unified Screening Mechanism Restricted Proceedings Order (rpo) Abuse of Process +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ai Dodoh

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Decision Refusing Leave and Making Restricted Proceedings Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director of Immigration lawfully refused the applicant's subsequent non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether there has been a significant change of circumstances under section 37ZO of the Immigration Ordinance sufficient to give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the Director's factual findings were irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Director's decision to refuse the subsequent claim was lawful and not Wednesbury unreasonable because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances or credibility sufficient to give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; consequently leave to apply for judicial review was refused and an RPO was justified to prevent abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; Restricted Proceedings Order made against applicant

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.
  • A Restricted Proceedings Order is made prohibiting the applicant from commencing or continuing any proceedings in the High Court relating to any non-refoulement claim without leave of the Court of First Instance, with specified procedural conditions for applying for leave.