KHAN KAMRAN v. CHAN PIK-KIU, MICHAEL, ESQ, TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD /NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

KHAN KAMRAN v. CHAN PIK-KIU, MICHAEL, ESQ, TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD /NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The second application for leave to apply for judicial review was struck out because it was an abuse of process and res judicata: the same grounds had already been considered and refused as not reasonably arguable in HCAL 466/2017, the applicant failed to disclose the earlier refusal when filing the new leave application, and no arguable legal error was shown to justify re-opening the matter; accordingly the leave application was dismissed.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2297
Parties
Applicant: Khan Kamran; Putative Respondent: Chan Pik-kiu, Michael, Esq, 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
25 September 2019
Case Number
HCAL426/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Struck Out
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review struck out and dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 3 HKBOR, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 3 HKBOR Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +4 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Kamran

Applicant

Chan Pik-kiu, Michael, Esq, Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Struck Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second leave application was an abuse of process/res judicata
  2. 2 Whether the applicant advanced reasonably arguable grounds for judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the Board/Director erred in assessing COI, state protection and internal relocation

Ratio Decidendi

The second application for leave to apply for judicial review was struck out because it was an abuse of process and res judicata: the same grounds had already been considered and refused as not reasonably arguable in HCAL 466/2017, the applicant failed to disclose the earlier refusal when filing the new leave application, and no arguable legal error was shown to justify re-opening the matter; accordingly the leave application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review struck out and dismissed

Orders

  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is struck out and dismissed.