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

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

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable ground of unlawfulness, unreasonableness or unfairness: the Adjudicator conducted a rehearing, provided an interpreter, allowed the applicant to answer questions, applied the correct legal principles and reached a decision open on the facts; therefore there was no realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review is refused.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1400
Parties
Applicant: Hassan Waleed; 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
30 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL307/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused (decision on Papers)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 3 HKBORO, Article 2 HKBORO, ICCPR Articles 6 and 7, Unified Screening Mechanism, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Interpreter Quality, Legal Representation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 3 HKBORO Article 2 HKBORO +6 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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hassan Waleed

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 Refused (decision on Papers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was procedural unfairness before the Adjudicator
  2. 2 Whether lack of legal representation or poor interpretation rendered the decision unlawful or unfair
  3. 3 Whether the Director's decision is reviewable after an appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable ground of unlawfulness, unreasonableness or unfairness: the Adjudicator conducted a rehearing, provided an interpreter, allowed the applicant to answer questions, applied the correct legal principles and reached a decision open on the facts; therefore there was no realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review is refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • If the applicant wishes to appeal this decision he must file a notice of appeal within 14 days and comply with Order 59 of the Rules of the High Court to progress the appeal.