ALAM MOHAMMAD RASHEDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ALAM MOHAMMAD RASHEDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by detailed reasons after oral evidence and the Director and Board permissibly found the risk localized with reasonable internal relocation available, so there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 1104
Parties
Applicant: Alam Mohammad Rashedul; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 May 2023
Case Number
HCAL2126/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application (non Refoulement/torture) / Leave Application Decision on Leave (dismissed)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Protection, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Protection Credibility Assessment Internal Relocation +2 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alam Mohammad Rashedul

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application (non Refoulement/torture) / Leave Application Decision on Leave (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an arguable error of law or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision
  2. 2 Whether the Board's adverse credibility findings were irrational or unsupported
  3. 3 Whether the Director/Board failed to make adequate enquiries into Country of Origin Information

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by detailed reasons after oral evidence and the Director and Board permissibly found the risk localized with reasonable internal relocation available, so there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed.