HOSSAIN MD SUMON v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

HOSSAIN MD SUMON v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The adjudicator’s credibility findings and assessment that the applicant left Bangladesh because of business failure rather than a real risk of persecution or torture were justified on the evidence; no error of law or procedural unfairness was demonstrated and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1121
Parties
Applicant: Hossain MD Sumon; 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
7 June 2018
Case Number
HCAL551/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Stage — Application for Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cat Risk, Convention Against Torture, Hong Kong Bill of Rights (arts 2 and 3), ICCPR (arts 6 and 7), Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Credibility Findings, Country of Origin Information (coi) Assessment, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture/cat Risk Convention Against Torture +6 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hossain MD Sumon

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 (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Stage — Application for Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator erred in law in rejecting non-refoulement and torture/CIDTP claims
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator applied the correct standard of proof
  3. 3 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the appeal hearing (including interpreter and time to prepare)

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator’s credibility findings and assessment that the applicant left Bangladesh because of business failure rather than a real risk of persecution or torture were justified on the evidence; no error of law or procedural unfairness was demonstrated and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable; accordingly the applicant’s grounds were not reasonably arguable and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused