IMPERIAL SHERYLL BARRIGA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

IMPERIAL SHERYLL BARRIGA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to present any reasonably arguable grounds of illegality, unreasonableness or procedural unfairness; the Adjudicator conducted a fair rehearing, made open and reasonable credibility and factual findings, and the Director's decision was not reviewable after the TCAB rehearing.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1330
Parties
Applicant: Imperial Sheryll Barriga; 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
23 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL1564/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Application for Leave (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply, Credibility Findings, Rehearing by TCAB
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Judicial Review +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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Imperial Sheryll Barriga

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 / Decision on Application for Leave (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there were arguable grounds of unlawfulness, unreasonableness or procedural unfairness to justify leave for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Adjudicator acted unfairly or made errors of law in assessing credibility and indebtedness
  3. 3 Whether the Director's decision remained reviewable after an appeal rehearing by the TCAB

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to present any reasonably arguable grounds of illegality, unreasonableness or procedural unfairness; the Adjudicator conducted a fair rehearing, made open and reasonable credibility and factual findings, and the Director's decision was not reviewable after the TCAB rehearing.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Decision and reasoned judgment to be served on parties (served 23 June 2020).