PVK v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

PVK v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

The court refused the application for a supplemental judgment because the existing judgment and reasons, read as a whole, plainly incorporated the conclusion that delay in CAT claim determinations would constitute procedural unfairness and that applicants would have succeeded on that ground; having decided the case on other grounds and given sufficient reasons, no supplemental judgment was necessary, although respondents must implement an appropriate assessment scheme with expedition.

Citation
PVK v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER
Parties
Applicant: FB; Applicant: NS; Applicant: M; Applicant: RO; Applicant: MO; Applicant: YO; Applicant: WO; Applicant: PVK; Applicant: ND; 1st Respondent: Director of Immigration; 2nd Respondent: Secretary for Security
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 April 2009
Case Number
HCAL125/2007
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (constitutional and Administrative Law) / Ruling on Application for Supplemental Judgment and Costs Order Nisi
Outcome
Application for supplemental judgment refused; declarations on agreed terms recorded; order nisi as to costs made that there be no order for costs on subsequent days of hearing.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Delay in Administrative Decision Making, CAT Claims (convention Against Torture), Judicial Review Remedies, Costs
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Procedural Fairness Delay in Administrative Decision Making CAT Claims (convention Against Torture) Judicial Review Remedies +1 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FB

Applicant

NS

Applicant

M

Applicant

RO

Applicant

MO

Applicant

YO

Applicant

WO

Applicant

PVK

Applicant

ND

Applicant

Director of Immigration

1st Respondent

Secretary for Security

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (constitutional and Administrative Law) / Ruling on Application for Supplemental Judgment and Costs Order Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a supplemental judgment was required to address alleged procedural unfairness arising from delay in CAT claim determinations
  2. 2 Whether delay in processing CAT claims constitutes procedural unfairness given the high standard of fairness required by Prabhakar
  3. 3 Whether applicants are entitled to individualized reasons on each ground of judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the application for a supplemental judgment because the existing judgment and reasons, read as a whole, plainly incorporated the conclusion that delay in CAT claim determinations would constitute procedural unfairness and that applicants would have succeeded on that ground; having decided the case on other grounds and given sufficient reasons, no supplemental judgment was necessary, although respondents must implement an appropriate assessment scheme with expedition.

Court Disposition

Application for supplemental judgment refused; declarations on agreed terms recorded; order nisi as to costs made that there be no order for costs on subsequent days of hearing.

Orders

  • Application for supplemental judgment refused
  • Declarations made on agreed terms pursuant to the judgment delivered on 5 December 2008