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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review and extension of time were refused because the applicant failed to explain the delay, produced no new or credible evidence to show an arguable case, and the Board's findings on credibility, risk, state protection and internal relocation disclosed no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness; therefore there was no reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 541
Parties
Applicant: Ayub Muhammad; 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
8 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL1241/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture/persecution) / Leave Stage With Application for Extension of Time/refusal of Leave
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; extension of time refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Judicial Review Leave, Extension of Time, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation +4 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayub Muhammad

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 (non Refoulement/torture/persecution) / Leave Stage With Application for Extension of Time/refusal of Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time should be extended for a late application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law, committed procedural unfairness or acted irrationally in rejecting the applicant's non-refoulement/torture/persecution claims
  3. 3 Whether the Board's credibility and risk assessments were Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review and extension of time were refused because the applicant failed to explain the delay, produced no new or credible evidence to show an arguable case, and the Board's findings on credibility, risk, state protection and internal relocation disclosed no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness; therefore there was no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; extension of time refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Extension of time to file the application refused