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

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

Leave refused because the applicant had no realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that there was no real risk, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable disclosed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and were not Wednesbury unreasonable.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 473
Parties
Applicant: Herni Setiowati; 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
26 February 2024
Case Number
HCAL1393/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement Appeal) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Persecution, Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave Stage
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Persecution +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Herni Setiowati

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement Appeal) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally/Wednesbury unreasonableness
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of harm/torture from her father

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant had no realistic prospect of success: the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that there was no real risk, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable disclosed no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality and were not Wednesbury unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed