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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success: the Board's factual findings (no state involvement) were accepted, the feared harm did not meet the statutory definition of torture, state protection and internal relocation were available, and the asserted procedural unfairness was inconsistent with the applicant's statements to the Court.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1564
Parties
Applicant: KAMRUNNAHAR Mst; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; Putative Interested Party: The Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 June 2019
Case Number
HCAL1722/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Refugee Convention, Judicial Review, Country of Origin Information, Domestic Violence
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Refugee Convention Judicial Review +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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KAMRUNNAHAR Mst

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether applicant faces risk of torture under section 37U(1) of the Immigration Ordinance (Cap.115)
  3. 3 Whether there is a risk under Article 2 and Article 3 of section 8 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap.383)

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to show a reasonable prospect of success: the Board's factual findings (no state involvement) were accepted, the feared harm did not meet the statutory definition of torture, state protection and internal relocation were available, and the asserted procedural unfairness was inconsistent with the applicant's statements to the Court.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed