HARIATININGSIH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

HARIATININGSIH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant had been guilty of most substantial and unexplained delay (over 19 months), the delay would be detrimental to good administration and cause prejudice, and the arguability/merits of the claim did not outweigh the public interest in finality and administrative efficiency despite the Board’s limited failure to consider merits.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1194
Parties
Applicant: Hariatiningsih; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 April 2021
Case Number
HCAL1348/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application
Outcome
Extension of time for the leave application refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Judicial Review Leave, Extension of Time/undue Delay, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Judicial Review Leave Extension of Time/undue Delay +2 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hariatiningsih

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was good reason to extend time for a leave application filed more than 19 months late
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in refusing late filing by failing to consider merits
  3. 3 Whether undue delay would cause prejudice or be detrimental to good administration

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused and leave dismissed because the applicant had been guilty of most substantial and unexplained delay (over 19 months), the delay would be detrimental to good administration and cause prejudice, and the arguability/merits of the claim did not outweigh the public interest in finality and administrative efficiency despite the Board’s limited failure to consider merits.

Court Disposition

Extension of time for the leave application refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for judicial review of the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board dated 29 August 2016 refused
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed