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

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant raised no valid or specific grounds demonstrating legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision and therefore has no realistic prospect of success.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2026] HKCFI 1086
Parties: Applicant: Arifin; 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: 5 March 2026
Case Number: HCAL1338/2025
Procedural Posture: Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome: Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics: Non‑refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor), Article 3 HKBOR (cidtp), Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Standard of Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language: en

Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Refugee Law Non‑refoulement Torture and CIDTP Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor) +6 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Arifin

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Board erred in law in its assessment of risk of harm, torture or persecution
2 Whether the Board failed to afford procedural fairness
3 Whether state protection was available and internal relocation viable

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.