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

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

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal ground and failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on internal relocation and state protection were within its fact-finding remit and were not shown to involve legal error or procedural unfairness.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1093
Parties
Applicant: Daryati; 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
5 March 2026
Case Number
HCAL1304/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor), Prohibition of Torture and CIDTP (article 3 Hkbor), Refugee Convention Article 33, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Judicial Review (leave)
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Right to Life (article 2 Hkbor) Prohibition of Torture and CIDTP (article 3 Hkbor) +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daryati

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision involved error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality
  2. 2 Whether applicant faces risk of torture or death on return (Immigration Ordinance Part VIIC; HKBOR Articles 2 and 3)
  3. 3 Whether persecution risk under Refugee Convention Article 33 is established

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal ground and failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on internal relocation and state protection were within its fact-finding remit and were not shown to involve legal error or procedural unfairness.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed