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

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

The Court refused leave because it found no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's findings that the dispute was private, state protection existed and internal relocation was available were supported by the evidence, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3360
Parties
Applicant: Do Thi Ha; 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
18 November 2021
Case Number
HCAL198/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (cidtp), Persecution, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Risk Assessment
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (cidtp) +7 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Do Thi Ha

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 Application (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of being killed or tortured on return
  2. 2 Whether the dispute was private or amounted to persecution
  3. 3 Whether state protection was available and effective

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused leave because it found no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's findings that the dispute was private, state protection existed and internal relocation was available were supported by the evidence, so the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed