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

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

Applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable or realistic prospect of success in judicial review because the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that no substantial risk of torture, death or persecution existed, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were supported by the evidence and did not disclose errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; accordingly leave was refused.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 5554
Parties
Applicant: Gurjant Singh; 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 December 2025
Case Number
HCAL143/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP Risk, Refugee Convention Article 33 (persecution), Judicial Review Leave Stage, Credibility and Fact Finding, State Protection and Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration and Asylum Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Risk Refugee Convention Article 33 (persecution) Judicial Review Leave Stage Credibility and Fact Finding +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gurjant Singh

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 (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or breached procedural fairness in dismissing the non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether the Board's credibility findings were irrational or unsupported by evidence
  3. 3 Whether there was a real risk of torture, death or persecution on return to India

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable or realistic prospect of success in judicial review because the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that no substantial risk of torture, death or persecution existed, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were supported by the evidence and did not disclose errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; accordingly leave was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

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