IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable public law error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or the Board's decisions; both decision-makers reasonably found no substantial risk, available state protection and viable internal relocation alternatives, rendering the intended judicial review without prospects of success.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1035
Parties
Applicant: Iftikhar Muhammad; 1st Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration; 2nd Putative Respondent: Sin Ming-hei, Adjudicator of Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL762/2018
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, HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life), HKBOR Article 3 (prohibition of Torture and Inhuman Treatment), Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life) HKBOR Article 3 (prohibition of Torture and Inhuman Treatment) +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iftikhar Muhammad

Applicant

The Director of Immigration

1st Putative Respondent

Sin Ming-hei, 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 erred in law or acted unfairly in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture and HKBOR claims
  2. 2 Whether state protection was unavailable or ineffective due to corruption such that non-refoulement protection was required
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Pakistan was unreasonable or unavailable to the Applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable public law error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or the Board's decisions; both decision-makers reasonably found no substantial risk, available state protection and viable internal relocation alternatives, rendering the intended judicial review without prospects of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.