KHAN AHSAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

KHAN AHSAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; both decision‑makers reasonably found the risk to be localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 1231
Parties
Applicant: Khan Ahsan; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 April 2022
Case Number
HCAL360/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/article 3 HKBOR, Right to Life/article 2 HKBOR, Risk Assessment, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Judicial Review Leave Standard
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture/article 3 HKBOR Right to Life/article 2 HKBOR Risk Assessment +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Ahsan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there were arguable errors of law or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's assessments of non-refoulement risks
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of torture, death or persecution from PML(N) supporters on return to Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether state protection or reasonable internal relocation was available to the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; both decision‑makers reasonably found the risk to be localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused