ASAD HUSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ASAD HUSSAIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; their adverse credibility findings and conclusions that state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available were open to them and removed any realistic prospect of success in a judicial review challenge.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1533
Parties
Applicant: Asad Hussain; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
31 May 2021
Case Number
HCAL1047/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (leave Dismissed)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; applicant's request to withdraw application acceded to.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 3 HKBOR, Article 2 HKBOR, Article 33 Refugee Convention, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Asad Hussain

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (leave Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of torture or persecution if returned to Pakistan (BOR 3, BOR 2, Article 33 Refugee Convention)
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; their adverse credibility findings and conclusions that state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available were open to them and removed any realistic prospect of success in a judicial review challenge.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; applicant's request to withdraw application acceded to.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
  • Applicant's request to withdraw the application acceded to.