HUSSAIN ALTAF v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

HUSSAIN ALTAF v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and the Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by evidence; the risk was localized and reasonable internal relocation was available, so there was no sustainable basis for non-refoulement protection and judicial review could not be used to re-hear factual assessments.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1413
Parties
Applicant: Hussain Altaf; 1st Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration; 2nd Putative Respondent: Adjudicator of Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
8 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL1473/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture (risk), Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Standard of Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture (risk) Credibility Findings Internal Relocation +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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hussain Altaf

Applicant

The Director of Immigration

1st Putative Respondent

Adjudicator of Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director and the Torture Claims Appeal Board committed errors of law or procedural unfairness in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or violation of non-derogable rights (BOR Art 2 and Art 3) on return to Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether the adverse credibility findings were sustainable and dispositive

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and the Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings were supported by evidence; the risk was localized and reasonable internal relocation was available, so there was no sustainable basis for non-refoulement protection and judicial review could not be used to re-hear factual assessments.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.