DO VAN DAT v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

DO VAN DAT v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to particularize or establish any arguable legal error; the Director and Board made reasoned findings that any risk was low, localized and defeasible by state protection and internal relocation; credibility concerns and COI reliance were lawful and not irrational; therefore there was no realistic prospect of success and leave was refused (further weighed by the applicant's later affirmation that it was safe to return).

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 4878
Parties
Applicant: Do Van Dat; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 October 2025
Case Number
HCAL847/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Dismissed
Outcome
Leave application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Screening and Appeal Procedure
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Procedural Fairness +4 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Do Van Dat

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board and Director erred in law or acted irrationally in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the Board failed to give proper weight to State acquiescence or country information (COI)
  3. 3 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in the Board's conduct of the hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The leave application was dismissed because the applicant failed to particularize or establish any arguable legal error; the Director and Board made reasoned findings that any risk was low, localized and defeasible by state protection and internal relocation; credibility concerns and COI reliance were lawful and not irrational; therefore there was no realistic prospect of success and leave was refused (further weighed by the applicant's later affirmation that it was safe to return).

Court Disposition

Leave application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.