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

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

Leave was refused because the Board made explicit adverse credibility findings and assessed risk, state protection and internal relocation; those findings contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and the applicant therefore had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 844
Parties
Applicant: Dinh Khac Trung; 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
1 April 2021
Case Number
HCAL1391/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave (consideration on Papers Under Order 53 R3 Rhc)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 2 Right to Life (hkbor), Article 3 CIDTP (hkbor), Refugee Convention Article 33, Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 2 Right to Life (hkbor) Article 3 CIDTP (hkbor) +5 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dinh Khac Trung

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 / Decision on Leave (consideration on Papers Under Order 53 R3 Rhc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant established real risk of torture, CIDTP, violation of right to life or persecution on return to Vietnam
  2. 2 Whether state protection and internal relocation were viable and sufficient
  3. 3 Whether the Board erred in law, committed procedural unfairness or reached an irrational/Wednesbury unreasonable decision

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the Board made explicit adverse credibility findings and assessed risk, state protection and internal relocation; those findings contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and the applicant therefore had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Application dismissed.