DO THI HA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

DO THI HA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to present a reasonably arguable claim with realistic prospects of success; although the court considered the Board's finding on severity of harm may have been open to challenge, the Board's uncontested finding that internal relocation was viable independently justified...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1630
Parties
Applicant: Do Thi Ha; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 March 2026
Case Number
HCAL2135/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Dismissed on Paper
Outcome
Leave application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Judicial Review Leave Threshold, Procedural Fairness, Irrationality Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Asylum and Non Refoulement Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Internal Relocation State Protection +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Do Thi Ha

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Dismissed on Paper

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally in finding the applicant did not suffer torture/CIDTP
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in assessing availability of state protection
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation was a viable solution negating non-refoulement protection

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to present a reasonably arguable claim with realistic prospects of success; although the court considered the Board's finding on severity of harm may have been open to challenge, the Board's uncontested finding that internal relocation was viable independently justified dismissal of the non-refoulement claim.

Court Disposition

Leave application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave application dismissed.
  • Application disposed of on paper.