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

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

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to challenge the Director's decision and there was no reasonable prospect of success given the Board's adverse credibility findings and the statutory allocation of fact-finding to the Board.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 413
Parties
Applicant: Khalil; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
25 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL1259/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused by Notification of the Judge
Outcome
Application for leave for judicial review refused and the application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Right to Life (hkbor S8 Art 2), Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (hkbor S8 Art 3), Procedural Impropriety, Judicial Review Leave, Credibility Findings, Country of Origin Information, State Acquiescence
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Right to Life (hkbor S8 Art 2) +6 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khalil

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused by Notification of the Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant may seek judicial review of the Director's decision absent exceptional circumstances
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural impropriety in the Director's or Board's consideration of Country of Origin Information
  3. 3 Whether the Board's adverse credibility findings preclude a reasonable prospect of success on judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to challenge the Director's decision and there was no reasonable prospect of success given the Board's adverse credibility findings and the statutory allocation of fact-finding to the Board.

Court Disposition

Application for leave for judicial review refused and the application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave for judicial review refused.
  • Applicant's application dismissed.