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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review and an extension of time were refused because the application was filed late, the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision, the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated and that state protection and internal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1429
Parties
Applicant: Kawaljit 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
25 May 2021
Case Number
HCAL297/2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application Refused and Extension of Time Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; extension of time refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Right to Life (bor Article 2), CIDTP (bor Article 3), Persecution (refugee Convention Article 33), State Protection, Internal Relocation, Delay/extension of Time, Judicial Review Standard of Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Human Rights Asylum and Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Right to Life (bor Article 2) CIDTP (bor Article 3) +5 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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kawaljit Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application Refused and Extension of Time Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time should be granted for application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board's decision on non-refoulement, torture risk, BOR 2 and BOR 3 and persecution was legally flawed, procedurally unfair or irrational
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review and an extension of time were refused because the application was filed late, the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision, the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated and that state protection and internal relocation were available were within its fact-finding province and not Wednesbury unreasonable, and there was no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; extension of time refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Extension of time refused