JASVIR SINGH AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

JASVIR SINGH AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicants failed to identify any legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or the Board's decisions; credibility findings and availability of internal relocation were properly open to the primary decision‑makers; there was no realistic prospect of success; and the death of the principal applicant removed the central risk on which the dependent claims rested.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2375
Parties
Applicant: Jasvir Singh; Applicant: Jaswinder Kaur; Applicant: Jatinder Singh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 November 2019
Case Number
HCAL871/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision Refusing Leave
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review (leave), Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Procedural Fairness Judicial Review (leave) +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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jasvir Singh

Applicant

Jaswinder Kaur

Applicant

Jatinder Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision Refusing Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director and the Board erred in law or in procedure in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether procedural fairness required additional screening interviews or translation of the Board's decision
  3. 3 Whether credibility findings of the Director/Board were justified

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicants failed to identify any legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or the Board's decisions; credibility findings and availability of internal relocation were properly open to the primary decision‑makers; there was no realistic prospect of success; and the death of the principal applicant removed the central risk on which the dependent claims rested.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Reasons dated 18 November 2019 recorded