ASHFAQ MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

ASHFAQ MUHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The Board and the Director made reasoned findings that the alleged risk was speculative or localized, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and no legal error or procedural unfairness was demonstrated; therefore there was no arguable prospect of success on judicial review and leave was refused.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2184
Parties
Applicant: Ashfaq Muhammad; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 September 2020
Case Number
HCAL663/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application for Leave / Leave Application Refused; Decision on Documents
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Judicial Review Leave, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Judicial Review Leave Internal Relocation +1 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashfaq Muhammad

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application for Leave / Leave Application Refused; Decision on Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or other non-derogable harm on return to Pakistan
  2. 2 Whether the Director and the Board made errors of law or procedural unfairness in assessing the claim
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Pakistan is a reasonable alternative to removal

Ratio Decidendi

The Board and the Director made reasoned findings that the alleged risk was speculative or localized, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and no legal error or procedural unfairness was demonstrated; therefore there was no arguable prospect of success on judicial review and leave was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused