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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on judicial review; the Board's adverse credibility and fact findings were within its province, there was no demonstrated legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the possibility of internal relocation or return with family negated the claimed risk.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4747
Parties
Applicant: Baljit Singh; 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
16 October 2025
Case Number
HCAL2250/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, HKBOR Article 2 Life Risk, HKBOR Article 3 CIDTP, Standard of Judicial Review, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP HKBOR Article 2 Life Risk +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

Baljit Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision involved error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality warranting judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk under HKBOR Article 2 (right to life)
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or CIDTP under HKBOR Article 3

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success on judicial review; the Board's adverse credibility and fact findings were within its province, there was no demonstrated legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality, and the possibility of internal relocation or return with family negated the claimed risk.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.
  • The applicant's application is dismissed.