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

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

The application for leave is refused because it was filed out of time without satisfactory explanation and the intended grounds have no realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility and fact findings and its conclusion that internal relocation is viable do not disclose error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality warranting judicial intervention.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2640
Parties
Applicant: Bui Thi Thuy; 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
HCAL970/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Non Refoulement Claim / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Refused)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review refused/dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, Standard of Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refoulement/torture Protection Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bui Thi Thuy

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Non Refoulement Claim / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave was made within time or whether time should be extended
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law, acted irrationally or committed procedural unfairness in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's credibility findings and factual determinations were reviewable on judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave is refused because it was filed out of time without satisfactory explanation and the intended grounds have no realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility and fact findings and its conclusion that internal relocation is viable do not disclose error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality warranting judicial intervention.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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