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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or unfairness in the Board's decision, the Board and Director had properly evaluated the evidence and found state protection and internal relocation available, and the applicant therefore had no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1362
Parties
Applicant: Do Manh Hau; 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
7 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL1781/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Stage Determination on Papers (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Persecution, Judicial Review Leave, Credibility and Evaluation of Evidence, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP +6 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Do Manh Hau

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Stage Determination on Papers (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law in denying the non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing by the Board
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has an arguable or reasonable prospect of success in judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or unfairness in the Board's decision, the Board and Director had properly evaluated the evidence and found state protection and internal relocation available, and the applicant therefore had no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Form 86 amended by deleting the Board and replacing it with the Director of Immigration as interested party