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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant's grounds were not reasonably arguable and he had no realistic prospect of success: the Adjudicator's credibility and factual findings were supported by evidence, there were no errors of law or procedural unfairness, the appeal bundle was served in time, and lack of representation or language difficulties did not cause demonstrated prejudice; state protection and internal relocation rendered non-refoulement protection unwarranted.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2574
Parties
Applicant: Hashem Ali; 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
11 December 2018
Case Number
HCAL483/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (notification of Decision Refusing Leave)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Constitutional and Administrative Law Human Rights Refugee and Asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture Procedural Fairness Credibility Assessment +4 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hashem Ali

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 / Leave Application (notification of Decision Refusing Leave)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision and the Adjudicator's findings were Wednesbury unreasonable or affected by error of law
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness arose from late service of the appeal bundle
  3. 3 Whether lack of legal representation and language difficulties breached duty of care to a self-represented claimant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant's grounds were not reasonably arguable and he had no realistic prospect of success: the Adjudicator's credibility and factual findings were supported by evidence, there were no errors of law or procedural unfairness, the appeal bundle was served in time, and lack of representation or language difficulties did not cause demonstrated prejudice; state protection and internal relocation rendered non-refoulement protection unwarranted.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.