DAS APURBA KUMAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

DAS APURBA KUMAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant filed his Form 86 more than three months late without any explanation, failed to identify any arguable legal ground or additional evidence he would rely on, and there was no realistic prospect of establishing error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions given their credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation which were unchallenged.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1502
Parties
Applicant: Das Apurba Kumar; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 June 2019
Case Number
HCAL595/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Non Refoulement/torture Decision / Application for Leave Dismissed and Extension of Time Refused
Outcome
Extension of time for leave refused; leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Unified Screening Mechanism, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Credibility Assessment +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Das Apurba Kumar

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Non Refoulement/torture Decision / Application for Leave Dismissed and Extension of Time Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for filing leave application under Order 53 r.4(1)
  2. 2 Whether there is a reasonable prospect of success on judicial review (errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality) in the Director's and Board's decisions
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation are realistically available

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant filed his Form 86 more than three months late without any explanation, failed to identify any arguable legal ground or additional evidence he would rely on, and there was no realistic prospect of establishing error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions given their credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation which were unchallenged.

Court Disposition

Extension of time for leave refused; leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for filing the application for leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed