DHAMENDER SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

DHAMENDER SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions; their findings that the risk was localized, speculative and negated by available state protection and reasonable internal relocation were rational and supported by evidence; therefore there was no prospect of success and leave for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 735
Parties
Applicant: Dhamender Singh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL847/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (notification of Judge's Decision)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance), Article 2 and Article 3 HKBOR Risks, Persecution (refugee Convention Article 33), Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance) Article 2 and Article 3 HKBOR Risks +5 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dhamender Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (notification of Judge's Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has an arguable ground of legal error or procedural unfairness to justify leave for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board erred in law in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  3. 3 Whether state protection or reasonable internal relocation in India negates non-refoulement protection

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions; their findings that the risk was localized, speculative and negated by available state protection and reasonable internal relocation were rational and supported by evidence; therefore there was no prospect of success and leave for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused