ALI MAJID v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

ALI MAJID v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The court refused leave because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness by the Director or the Board: he provided no evidence he did not receive invitations or decisions, did not raise alleged omissions at the Board hearing, the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by detailed reasons, and reliable COI established reasonable internal relocation; therefore no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2128
Parties
Applicant: Ali Majid; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration; Putative Interested Party: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
5 October 2018
Case Number
HCAL1064/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Article 3 HKBOR, Article 2 HKBOR, Persecution, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Legal Representation
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Article 3 HKBOR Article 2 HKBOR +5 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ali Majid

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant was denied procedural fairness by lack of legal representation or by not receiving the Director's correspondence
  2. 2 Whether the Director and the Board erred in law in assessing risk under Part VIIC Immigration Ordinance, Article 2 and Article 3 HKBOR and Article 33 Refugee Convention
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Pakistan was a viable alternative negating non-refoulement protection

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused leave because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness by the Director or the Board: he provided no evidence he did not receive invitations or decisions, did not raise alleged omissions at the Board hearing, the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by detailed reasons, and reliable COI established reasonable internal relocation; therefore no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.