ATHALAGE PRASAD SUSANTHA PERERA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

ATHALAGE PRASAD SUSANTHA PERERA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on risk, state protection and internal relocation showed no error of law or procedural unfairness and were not Wednesbury unreasonable, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3852
Parties
Applicant: Athalage Prasad Susantha Perera; 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
24 December 2021
Case Number
HCAL493/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Stage (application for Leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review (leave), Wednesbury Irrationality, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Procedural Fairness +4 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Athalage Prasad Susantha Perera

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Stage (application for Leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision involved procedural unfairness
  2. 2 Whether the Board's factual findings were irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether there was a real risk of torture, violation of right to life, or persecution on return

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on risk, state protection and internal relocation showed no error of law or procedural unfairness and were not Wednesbury unreasonable, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

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