BUSTO JOCELYN MANUEL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

BUSTO JOCELYN MANUEL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The leave application was refused because the Board lawfully applied the USM, made factual credibility findings based on contradictions between the applicant's written and oral accounts, reasonably concluded there was no real risk of proscribed harm, and the decision displayed no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness; consequently the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success. Additionally, leave was granted to amend the Form 86 to substitute the Board for the adjudicator as the proper respondent.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 839
Parties
Applicant: Busto Jocelyn Manuel; 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
19 March 2024
Case Number
HCAL376/2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Decision on Leave Application (leave Dismissed; Leave to Amend Form 86 Allowed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; leave to amend Form 86 granted to substitute the Board for the adjudicator
Legal Topics
Unified Screening Mechanism, Torture Risk, Persecution Risk, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Leave to Amend Pleadings
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Non Refoulement Law Judicial Review Procedure Unified Screening Mechanism Torture Risk Persecution Risk State Protection +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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Busto Jocelyn Manuel

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Decision on Leave Application (leave Dismissed; Leave to Amend Form 86 Allowed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law in dismissing the applicant's non-refoulement claim under the USM
  2. 2 Whether the Board's decision involved procedural unfairness (late bundle, language assistance)
  3. 3 Whether the Board's credibility findings and risk assessment were irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The leave application was refused because the Board lawfully applied the USM, made factual credibility findings based on contradictions between the applicant's written and oral accounts, reasonably concluded there was no real risk of proscribed harm, and the decision displayed no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness; consequently the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success. Additionally, leave was granted to amend the Form 86 to substitute the Board for the adjudicator as the proper respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; leave to amend Form 86 granted to substitute the Board for the adjudicator

Orders

  • Leave to amend the Form 86 by substituting the Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office for the adjudicator as putative respondent is allowed
  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed