DARBOE LANSANA v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

DARBOE LANSANA v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error or procedural unfairness: the Director and the Board conducted a proper assessment based on COI and evidence, found low risk given political change in Gambia and inconsistencies in the applicant's account, and judicial review...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 295
Parties
Applicant: Darboe Lansana; 1st Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration; 2nd Putative Respondent: The Adjudicator of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL992/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture, HKBOR Articles 2 and 3, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Country of Origin Information, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture HKBOR Articles 2 and 3 +4 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darboe Lansana

Applicant

The Director of Immigration

1st Putative Respondent

The Adjudicator of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was arguable state acquiescence and lack of protection amounting to a torture/non-refoulement risk
  2. 2 Whether the Director and the Board improperly evaluated or selectively relied on Country of Origin Information
  3. 3 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in the screening and appeal process

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error or procedural unfairness: the Director and the Board conducted a proper assessment based on COI and evidence, found low risk given political change in Gambia and inconsistencies in the applicant's account, and judicial review cannot be used to re-litigate primary factual evaluations.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused