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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to establish any arguable factual or legal basis; the Board's adverse factual findings were credible and the applicant had no reasonable prospect of success and did not demonstrate error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1758
Parties
Applicant: Khan Oliur Rahman; 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
31 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL1738/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused on Paper Under Order 53 R.3; Application Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture, Persecution/refugee Convention, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave to Apply
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Human Rights Administrative Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture Persecution/refugee Convention State Protection +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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Oliur Rahman

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 / Leave Refused on Paper Under Order 53 R.3; Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in fact-finding
  2. 2 Whether there was a real risk of torture or death if returned
  3. 3 Whether state protection was available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to establish any arguable factual or legal basis; the Board's adverse factual findings were credible and the applicant had no reasonable prospect of success and did not demonstrate error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed