BACHITTAR SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

BACHITTAR SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant was 11 months out of time without any explanation, and his intended challenge disclosed no arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions which had reasonably found a localized private-family risk, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3469
Parties
Applicant: Bachittar Singh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 November 2021
Case Number
HCAL1291/2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave to Apply / Application for Leave and Extension of Time Refused; Leave Application Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time Internal Relocation +3 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bachittar Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave to Apply / Application for Leave and Extension of Time Refused; Leave Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for bringing a judicial review (Order 53 r 4(1))
  2. 2 Whether the intended judicial review has any arguable merits or discloses error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces real risk on return (torture, BOR Articles 2 and 3, persecution)

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant was 11 months out of time without any explanation, and his intended challenge disclosed no arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions which had reasonably found a localized private-family risk, availability of state protection and reasonable internal relocation.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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