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

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

The application for extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant failed to apply within the three-month period from the Board's decision (19 May 2017), offered no satisfactory explanation for a delay of over 14 months, and the intended judicial review had no reasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 215
Parties
Applicant: Das Bindha; 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
20 January 2020
Case Number
HCAL1596/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application (notification of Judge's Decision)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Delay, Leave to Apply, Credibility Findings
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Non Refoulement Torture Risk +3 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Das Bindha

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 / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application (notification of Judge's Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time for applying for leave to apply for judicial review should be granted given delay
  2. 2 Whether the Board's decision was amenable to judicial review or barred by appeal route
  3. 3 Whether the intended judicial review had a reasonable prospect of success given credibility findings and unsubstantiated facts

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant failed to apply within the three-month period from the Board's decision (19 May 2017), offered no satisfactory explanation for a delay of over 14 months, and the intended judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success given the Board's adverse credibility finding and lack of substantiated facts.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Extension of time for application for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's decision dated 19 May 2017 refused.
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.