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

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

The Adjudicator conducted a proper analysis of the applicant's evidence and COI, reasonably rejected the credibility of alleged death threats, and reasonably found state protection and internal relocation available; there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness, therefore the applicant's grounds were not reasonably arguable and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2169
Parties
Applicant: Endriyani; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 September 2019
Case Number
HCAL874/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CAT Protection, Risk Assessment, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture and CAT Protection Risk Assessment State Protection +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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Endriyani

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Adjudicator failed to take into account applicant's psychological strain and repeated threats
  2. 2 Whether the Adjudicator erred in assessing credibility of threats and evidence
  3. 3 Whether reasonable state protection and internal relocation were available

Ratio Decidendi

The Adjudicator conducted a proper analysis of the applicant's evidence and COI, reasonably rejected the credibility of alleged death threats, and reasonably found state protection and internal relocation available; there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury unreasonableness, therefore the applicant's grounds were not reasonably arguable and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.