DONG VAN DUC v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

DONG VAN DUC v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Extension of time refused and leave dismissed because the applicant was extremely late (over 22 months) with no explanation, the proposed grounds were vague and lacked particulars or reasonably arguable merit, and there was no identified legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions which had fairly assessed risk and internal relocation.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 985
Parties
Applicant: Dong Van Duc; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 March 2025
Case Number
HCAL1766/2024
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Asylum and Non Refoulement Judicial Review Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Non Refoulement Torture Risk +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dong Van Duc

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time for applying for leave should be extended under Order 53 r 4(1) Rules of the High Court
  2. 2 Whether the intended judicial review has any reasonably arguable merits
  3. 3 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally or procedurally unfairly in rejecting the non-refoulement claim based on private creditor threats

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time refused and leave dismissed because the applicant was extremely late (over 22 months) with no explanation, the proposed grounds were vague and lacked particulars or reasonably arguable merit, and there was no identified legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions which had fairly assessed risk and internal relocation.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 24 August 2022 refused
  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed