ALAM MOHAMMAD MAHTAB v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

ALAM MOHAMMAD MAHTAB 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 failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law or procedure by the Director or the Board and failed to show a reasonable prospect of success; evaluation of evidence is a matter for the Director and the Board, not the court.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 817
Parties
Applicant: Alam Mohammad Mahtab; 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
15 May 2020
Case Number
HCAL1771/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Application for Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Refugee Convention, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Refugee Convention Judicial Review Leave

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alam Mohammad Mahtab

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 / Application for Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board/Director erred in evaluating evidence and law in non-refoulement and torture claims
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a reasonable prospect of success on judicial review
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were available to the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law or procedure by the Director or the Board and failed to show a reasonable prospect of success; evaluation of evidence is a matter for the Director and the Board, not the court.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused.
  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed.