JUNAID KHAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

JUNAID KHAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error in the Director's or Board's decisions; both bodies lawfully and reasonably found the risk to be localized, that state protection and internal relocation were available, and there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 315
Parties
Applicant: Junaid Khan; 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
1 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL581/2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance), Article 3 HKBOR (bor 3), Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life), Persecution and Refugee Law (article 33, 1951 Convention), Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance) Article 3 HKBOR (bor 3) Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life) +4 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Junaid Khan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is an arguable legal error in the Director's and Board's decisions warranting leave for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, or persecution on return to Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether state protection is available and internal relocation is reasonable and effective

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error in the Director's or Board's decisions; both bodies lawfully and reasonably found the risk to be localized, that state protection and internal relocation were available, and there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused