KARTINI v. THE ADJUDICATOR OF THE TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

KARTINI v. THE ADJUDICATOR OF THE TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Where a statutory appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board exists and the Board has decided the matter, an applicant cannot seek judicial review of the Director's decision absent exceptional circumstances; the Board properly rejected the applicant's claim as unsubstantiated and inconsistent, leaving no reasonable prospect of success for judicial review, so leave is refused.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1281
Parties
Applicant: Kartini; 1st Putative Respondent: The Adjudicator of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 May 2019
Case Number
HCAL1911/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Prohibition of Torture and CIDTP, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness, State Protection/acquiescence
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Refugee Law Non Refoulement Prohibition of Torture and CIDTP Judicial Review Leave Procedural Fairness +1 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kartini

Applicant

The Adjudicator of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant may seek judicial review of the Director's decision where a statutory appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board exists
  2. 2 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to permit review of the Director's decision
  3. 3 Whether the Board erred in rejecting the applicant's non-refoulement/torture claim given alleged inconsistencies in evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Where a statutory appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board exists and the Board has decided the matter, an applicant cannot seek judicial review of the Director's decision absent exceptional circumstances; the Board properly rejected the applicant's claim as unsubstantiated and inconsistent, leaving no reasonable prospect of success for judicial review, so leave is refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed