KHAN BAKHTIAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

KHAN BAKHTIAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions; both bodies reasonably found the risk localized and low and that state protection and internal relocation were available, so there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 315
Parties
Applicant: Khan Bakhtiar; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 January 2022
Case Number
HCAL278/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (leave Stage)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture, Article 3 HKBOR, Article 2 HKBOR, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture Article 3 HKBOR Article 2 HKBOR +2 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Bakhtiar

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (leave Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is an arguable ground of illegality, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's decision warranting leave for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant established a real risk of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or persecution on return to Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether state protection and reasonable internal relocation alternatives are available such that non-refoulement does not apply

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions; both bodies reasonably found the risk localized and low and that state protection and internal relocation were available, so 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.