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

KHAN JUNAIT ALI 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 the Board’s decisions; the Board’s credibility findings, assessment of localized low‑intensity risk, and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were within the primary decision‑makers’ evaluative remit and lawful.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 1598
Parties
Applicant: Khan Junait Ali; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 March 2026
Case Number
HCAL825/2021
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 Risk, HKBOR Articles 2 and 3, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Torture Risk HKBOR Articles 2 and 3 Internal Relocation +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Junait Ali

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 leave should be granted to challenge the Torture Claims Appeal Board decision
  2. 2 Whether the Board or Director erred in law, acted irrationally or committed procedural unfairness in assessing risk
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation and state protection rendered non-refoulement inapplicable

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 the Board’s decisions; the Board’s credibility findings, assessment of localized low‑intensity risk, and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were within the primary decision‑makers’ evaluative remit and lawful.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

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