ARIF HUSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

ARIF HUSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the applicant failed to advance reasonably arguable grounds of legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board’s adverse credibility finding and the conclusions on low risk and viable internal relocation were supported by reasons and COI and were not susceptible to judicial review as asserted by the applicant.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2144
Parties
Applicant: Arif Hussain; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 August 2020
Case Number
HCAL691/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Stage Decision Refusing Leave
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Refugee/persecution, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Country of Origin Information
Source Language
EN
Immigration Constitutional and Administrative Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Refugee/persecution Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Credibility Assessment +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arif Hussain

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Stage Decision Refusing Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board committed legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in rejecting non-refoulement/torture/BOR claims
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available in Pakistan

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to advance reasonably arguable grounds of legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board’s adverse credibility finding and the conclusions on low risk and viable internal relocation were supported by reasons and COI and were not susceptible to judicial review as asserted by the applicant.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.