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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to particularise any reasonably arguable public law ground (error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality) capable of vitiating the TCAB/NRCPO decision; the TCAB's adverse credibility findings and its conclusions on torture, BOR2/BOR3, persecution, state protection and internal relocation were within the decision‑maker's province and not shown to be vitiated; any narrow approach to BOR2 would not have changed the result and granting leave would be futile.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1961
Parties
Applicant: Khan Ammad; 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
16 April 2026
Case Number
HCAL92/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Leave Application (decision on Papers; Dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance), Article 2 BOR (right to Life), Article 3 BOR (torture/cruel Inhuman Degrading Treatment), Persecution Under Refugee Convention (article 33), Judicial Review Leave Test, Enhanced Wednesbury/irrationality Review, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation/state Protection
Source Language
EN
Immigration Constitutional and Administrative Law Human Rights Refugee and Asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (part VIIC Immigration Ordinance) Article 2 BOR (right to Life) Article 3 BOR (torture/cruel Inhuman Degrading Treatment) +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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Ammad

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Leave Application (decision on Papers; Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant identified any reasonably arguable ground of judicial review
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the TCAB/NRCPO process
  3. 3 Whether the TCAB/NRCPO made errors of law or irrational findings warranting intervention

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to particularise any reasonably arguable public law ground (error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality) capable of vitiating the TCAB/NRCPO decision; the TCAB's adverse credibility findings and its conclusions on torture, BOR2/BOR3, persecution, state protection and internal relocation were within the decision‑maker's province and not shown to be vitiated; any narrow approach to BOR2 would not have changed the result and granting leave would be futile.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Form 86 amended on court's own motion to name Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office as Putative Respondent and Director of Immigration as Putative Interested Party and to add the TCAB/NRCPO decision dated 15 January 2021
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed