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

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

Leave refused because the applicant did not identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's assessment that risk was low and that state protection and internal relocation were available was rational and supported by COI, so judicial review was not warranted.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1284
Parties
Applicant: Khan Waris; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 May 2021
Case Number
HCAL1529/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and Article 3 BOR, Persecution and Article 33 Refugee Convention, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture and Article 3 BOR Persecution and Article 33 Refugee Convention +3 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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Waris

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in credibility findings
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation were correctly assessed

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant did not identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's assessment that risk was low and that state protection and internal relocation were available was rational and supported by COI, so judicial review was not warranted.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.