ARSHAD alias ARSHAD NUMY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ARSHAD alias ARSHAD NUMY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the Applicant's delay was extremely substantial and unexplained, his Form 86 advanced no arguable legal grounds, and the Director and Board had given coherent reasons (including availability of state protection and internal relocation) with no identifiable legal error or procedural unfairness to justify judicial intervention.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 426
Parties
Applicant: Arshad alias Arshad Numy; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 February 2023
Case Number
HCAL1700/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (extension of Time Refused; Leave Dismissed)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Right to Life (hkbor Article 2), Prohibition of Torture and Article 3 HKBOR, Delay and Extension of Time, Judicial Review Procedure, Internal Relocation, State Protection
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Right to Life (hkbor Article 2) Prohibition of Torture and Article 3 HKBOR Delay and Extension of Time Judicial Review Procedure +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arshad alias Arshad Numy

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (extension of Time Refused; Leave Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for an out-of-time application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in refusing to allow late filing of appeal under s37ZT(2) of the Immigration Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant established an arguable BOR 2 (right to life) claim

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to extend time and dismissed the leave application because the Applicant's delay was extremely substantial and unexplained, his Form 86 advanced no arguable legal grounds, and the Director and Board had given coherent reasons (including availability of state protection and internal relocation) with no identifiable legal error or procedural unfairness to justify judicial intervention.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.