BEGUM JAHANARA v. IAN CANDY, ESQ, ADJUDICATOR OF THE TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

BEGUM JAHANARA v. IAN CANDY, ESQ, ADJUDICATOR OF THE TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The second leave application was struck out and dismissed because it sought to re-litigate the same grounds already considered and refused in HCAL 621/2017, lacked any new reasonably arguable legal basis or prospect of success, and therefore constituted res judicata and an abuse of process; no basis existed to disturb the Director's and Board's lawful assessments of COI, state protection and internal relocation.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2613
Parties
Applicant: Begum Jahanara; Putative Respondent: Ian Candy, ESQ, Adjudicator of the 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
23 December 2019
Case Number
HCAL428/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave to Apply / Leave Application Struck Out and Dismissed
Outcome
The Application for leave to apply for judicial review was struck out and dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, HKBOR Article 3, HKBOR Article 2, 1951 Refugee Convention Article 33, Res Judicata, Abuse of Process, Procedural Fairness, Country of Origin Information, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Strike Out
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk HKBOR Article 3 +9 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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Begum Jahanara

Applicant

Ian Candy, ESQ, Adjudicator of the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave to Apply / Leave Application Struck Out and Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second application for leave to apply for judicial review is barred by res judicata/abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator/Board committed procedural unfairness in relation to COI, failure to call expert evidence, incorrect standard of proof, or inadequate legal representation
  3. 3 Whether the Director and Board erred in assessing state protection and internal relocation as realistic alternatives

Ratio Decidendi

The second leave application was struck out and dismissed because it sought to re-litigate the same grounds already considered and refused in HCAL 621/2017, lacked any new reasonably arguable legal basis or prospect of success, and therefore constituted res judicata and an abuse of process; no basis existed to disturb the Director's and Board's lawful assessments of COI, state protection and internal relocation.

Court Disposition

The Application for leave to apply for judicial review was struck out and dismissed.

Orders

  • The Application for leave to apply for judicial review is struck out and dismissed.