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

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

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision and therefore did not show a realistic prospect of success for judicial review; leave is refused and the application dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 5332
Parties
Applicant: Kashmir Singh; 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
19 November 2025
Case Number
HCAL1108/2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Decision on Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Prohibition of Torture, Article 3 HKBOR (cidtp), Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life), State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review (leave)
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Prohibition of Torture Article 3 HKBOR (cidtp) Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life) State Protection +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kashmir Singh

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) / Decision on Leave Application (refused)

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or breached procedural fairness in assessing risk of torture or CIDTP
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law or breached procedural fairness in concluding state protection was available
  3. 3 Whether the Board erred in law or breached procedural fairness in finding internal relocation viable

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision and therefore did not show a realistic prospect of success for judicial review; leave is refused and the application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused.
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.