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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to show any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's credibility findings and risk assessments fell within its fact-finding remit and there was no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 2100
Parties
Applicant: Faiz Khan; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 July 2022
Case Number
HCAL658/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, Persecution, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply
Source Language
en
Immigration Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Persecution State Protection +4 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faiz Khan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board committed errors of law in its decision
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the Board's hearing
  3. 3 Whether the Board's findings were irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to show any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's credibility findings and risk assessments fell within its fact-finding remit and there was no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application for leave dismissed