DALOWAR MOHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

DALOWAR MOHAMMAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law or procedural unfairness reasonably arguable on the facts; the TCAB adjudicator conducted a rehearing, considered the evidence and reasonably concluded there was no real risk of torture, CIDTP, persecution or arbitrary deprivation of life; the grounds advanced do not meet the threshold for leave under the governing authorities including the enhanced Wednesbury test.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1340
Parties
Applicant: Dalowar Mohammad; 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
25 June 2018
Case Number
HCAL533/2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Decision on Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Refugee/persecution Risk, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Country of Origin Information
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Refugee/persecution Risk Procedural Fairness Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +2 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dalowar Mohammad

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 (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant established an arguable error of law by the adjudicator/TCAB
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness arose from provision of the appeal bundle in English and lack of translation/interpretation
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator improperly assessed credibility

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law or procedural unfairness reasonably arguable on the facts; the TCAB adjudicator conducted a rehearing, considered the evidence and reasonably concluded there was no real risk of torture, CIDTP, persecution or arbitrary deprivation of life; the grounds advanced do not meet the threshold for leave under the governing authorities including the enhanced Wednesbury test.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application for adjournment refused