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

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

Leave was granted because the Adjudicator, having accepted the applicant was absent for cause on 18 April 2018, should have arranged a substitute hearing and put his credibility doubts to the applicant for explanation; failure to do so deprived the applicant of an opportunity to be heard and constituted a reasonably...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1978
Parties
Applicant: Gulraiz; 1st Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 August 2019
Case Number
HCAL1038/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) Non Refoulement Claim / Leave Application Granted
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 18 May 2018 granted
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Procedural Fairness Credibility Assessment Judicial Review +1 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gulraiz

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) Non Refoulement Claim / Leave Application Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's refusal to arrange a substitute hearing after accepting absence for cause amounted to substantive procedural unfairness
  2. 2 Whether lack of legal representation or late service of bundle and language assistance rendered the Board's decision unfair
  3. 3 Whether the Adjudicator erred by failing to put adverse credibility doubts to the Applicant before deciding against him

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the Adjudicator, having accepted the applicant was absent for cause on 18 April 2018, should have arranged a substitute hearing and put his credibility doubts to the applicant for explanation; failure to do so deprived the applicant of an opportunity to be heard and constituted a reasonably arguable case of substantial procedural unfairness warranting leave to apply for judicial review of the Board's decision dated 18 May 2018.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 18 May 2018 granted

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 18 May 2018 be allowed
  • Applicant must serve the order granting leave and any directions on the respondent and interested parties within 14 days