BUI THI PHUONG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

BUI THI PHUONG v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of COI, risk, state protection and internal relocation were supported by the evidence and reasoning; no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated and there was no reasonably arguable prospect of success.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2637
Parties
Applicant: Bui Thi Phuong; 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
15 October 2020
Case Number
HCAL959/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non‑refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Credibility Findings, Country of Origin Information (coi), State Protection, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Non‑refoulement Non‑refoulement Torture and CIDTP Credibility Findings Country of Origin Information (coi) +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bui Thi Phuong

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision
  2. 2 Whether the Board's adverse credibility findings were irrational or unsupported by evidence
  3. 3 Whether the alleged past ill‑treatment met the threshold for torture or CIDTP

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of COI, risk, state protection and internal relocation were supported by the evidence and reasoning; no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated and there was no reasonably arguable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused