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

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

The renewed application for leave was refused as an abuse of process because the Applicant failed to show any good reason to relitigate issues already rejected in HCAL 345/2017; in those circumstances the court would not consider the merits of the non-refoulement claim and refused leave.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1775
Parties
Applicant: Fatima Mrs; 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
2 August 2018
Case Number
HCAL1133/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Leave Refused (leave Application)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Persecution, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Abuse of Process, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Persecution Internal Relocation +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fatima Mrs

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 / Renewed Application for Leave Refused (leave Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the renewed application for leave to apply for judicial review was justified or an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the Board and Director acted unfairly or unreasonably in refusing non-refoulement protection on grounds of torture, persecution, CIDTP and risk to life
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant had been denied procedural fairness by late service of the appeal bundle and lack of representation

Ratio Decidendi

The renewed application for leave was refused as an abuse of process because the Applicant failed to show any good reason to relitigate issues already rejected in HCAL 345/2017; in those circumstances the court would not consider the merits of the non-refoulement claim and refused leave.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.