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

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

Leave refused because applicant failed to identify any arguable legal ground; the Board's findings on credibility, state protection and internal relocation were lawful and not irrational or procedurally unfair; applicant had no reasonable prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 499
Parties
Applicant: Gurmeet Kaur; 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 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL1258/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Assessment of Credibility and COI, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Assessment of Credibility and COI +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 6 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gurmeet Kaur

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board committed errors of law or procedural unfairness or made an irrational decision warranting judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has an arguable case and a reasonable prospect of success on judicial review
  3. 3 Whether claimed risks (torture, persecution, BOR Articles 2 and 3) were real and foreseeable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because applicant failed to identify any arguable legal ground; the Board's findings on credibility, state protection and internal relocation were lawful and not irrational or procedurally unfair; applicant had no reasonable prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused
  • Applicant's application dismissed