HUSSAIN MUNAWAR v. NICHOLAS CHAN, THE ADJUDICATOR OF THE TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

HUSSAIN MUNAWAR v. NICHOLAS CHAN, THE ADJUDICATOR OF THE TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success: the Board properly accepted his account but reasonably concluded that state protection and internal relocation in Pakistan were available, it was entitled to rely on country information and UNHCR...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 391
Parties
Applicant: Hussain Munawar; Putative Respondent: Nicholas Chan, the Adjudicator of the 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
22 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL1100/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cat Risk, BOR Article 2 (right to Life), BOR Article 3 (cidtp), Country of Origin Information, Legal Representation, Screening Procedure
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture/cat Risk BOR Article 2 (right to Life) +4 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hussain Munawar

Applicant

Nicholas Chan, the Adjudicator of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture/BOR claims
  2. 2 Whether state protection and internal relocation in Pakistan were reasonably available
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was unfairly prejudiced by lack of legal representation or late/heavy-English hearing bundle

Ratio Decidendi

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success: the Board properly accepted his account but reasonably concluded that state protection and internal relocation in Pakistan were available, it was entitled to rely on country information and UNHCR materials, and there was no legal obligation to conduct a further screening interview for BOR2 on the facts presented.

Court Disposition

Leave for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed