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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and its assessment that state protection and internal relocation were available involved no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 993
Parties
Applicant: Khan Zahid; 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
8 April 2022
Case Number
HCAL203/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation, State Protection
Source Language
en
Immigration Constitutional and Administrative Law Human Rights Refugee Law Torture and CIDTP Non Refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Credibility Findings +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan Zahid

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 Stage (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision contained errors of law or procedural unfairness warranting judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture on return (Immigration Ordinance Part VII C)
  3. 3 Whether return would violate right to life (HKBOR Article 2) or constitute CIDTP (HKBOR Article 3)

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a realistic prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility findings and its assessment that state protection and internal relocation were available involved no error of law, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury irrationality and were within the Board's fact‑finding remit.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Application dismissed.