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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the TCAB adjudicator's negative credibility findings were supported by material inconsistencies, she applied correct legal principles and adequate reasons, there was no procedural unfairness or error of law and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable, so the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 903
Parties
Applicant: Kamran; 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
8 May 2018
Case Number
HCAL501/2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 2 Right to Life, Article 3 Prohibition of CIDTP, Refugee Status, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 2 Right to Life Article 3 Prohibition of CIDTP +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kamran

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant faces a real risk of torture if returned to Pakistan
  2. 2 Whether applicant faces risk to life (BOR Art 2/ICCPR Art 6)
  3. 3 Whether applicant faces risk of CIDTP (BOR Art 3/ICCPR Art 7)

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the TCAB adjudicator's negative credibility findings were supported by material inconsistencies, she applied correct legal principles and adequate reasons, there was no procedural unfairness or error of law and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable, so the application lacked a realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused