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

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

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board correctly applied the law, accepted the Applicant's evidence where credible, made reasonable factual findings that the assault caused only minor injury, found no state involvement or BOR 2 risk, and reasonably concluded internal relocation was viable and COI cited were reliable, so the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1123
Parties
Applicant: Al Amin; 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
25 February 2026
Case Number
HCAL477/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; Form 86 amended on the Court's own motion
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Judicial Review, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Internal Relocation, Torture and Ill Treatment
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Judicial Review Wednesbury Unreasonableness Internal Relocation +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Al Amin

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 / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law, acted procedurally unfairly or reached an irrational decision such that judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant established risk of torture or arbitrary deprivation of life if returned to Bangladesh (BOR 2 risk)
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Bangladesh was viable for the Applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board correctly applied the law, accepted the Applicant's evidence where credible, made reasonable factual findings that the assault caused only minor injury, found no state involvement or BOR 2 risk, and reasonably concluded internal relocation was viable and COI cited were reliable, so the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; Form 86 amended on the Court's own motion

Orders

  • Form 86 amended on the Court’s own motion
  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused