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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify clear grounds and the Board's Decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality: the Board's credibility findings, assessment of risk, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were reasonable and the claim lacked realistic prospects of success.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 2853
Parties
Applicant: Do Van Ngoc; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
8 July 2025
Case Number
HCAL351/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Decision on Leave (dismissed)
Outcome
Leave application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Burden and Standard of Proof
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional and Administrative Law Human Rights Public Law Administrative Law Non Refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Do Van Ngoc

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Decision on Leave (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant identified arguable grounds for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board made errors of law in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  3. 3 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the Board's hearing

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify clear grounds and the Board's Decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality: the Board's credibility findings, assessment of risk, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were reasonable and the claim lacked realistic prospects of success.

Court Disposition

Leave application dismissed

Orders

  • On the court's own motion, amend name of putative respondent to Torture Claims Appeal Board
  • On the court's own motion, amend name of putative interested party to Director of Immigration