BUTT MUHAMMAD GULZAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

BUTT MUHAMMAD GULZAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant's 14-month delay was inexcusable, he failed to provide any explanation or to identify any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's reasoned adverse credibility and risk findings, and there was no prospect of success on judicial review; the court therefore dismissed the leave application (also acceding to applicant's request to withdraw).

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1087
Parties
Applicant: Butt Muhammad Gulzar; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 April 2021
Case Number
HCAL163/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Decided — Dismissed
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Delay and Extension of Time, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Credibility Findings +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Butt Muhammad Gulzar

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Decided — Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the leave application was made promptly and within the three-month limit
  2. 2 Whether there was good reason to extend time for filing
  3. 3 Whether the Board committed error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in rejecting the non-refoulement claim

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant's 14-month delay was inexcusable, he failed to provide any explanation or to identify any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's reasoned adverse credibility and risk findings, and there was no prospect of success on judicial review; the court therefore dismissed the leave application (also acceding to applicant's request to withdraw).

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
  • Application dismissed following applicant's request to withdraw and on grounds of excessive delay and absence of any reasonably arguable prospect of success.