MADDHESIA BIRENDRA KUMAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

MADDHESIA BIRENDRA KUMAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for leave had no reasonable prospect of success because the applicant's allegations did not establish Convention/Ordinance protection, internal protection was available, and the procedural complaints did not demonstrate unfairness; accordingly leave was refused and the application dismissed.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2227
Parties
Applicant: Maddhesia Birendra Kumar; 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
6 September 2019
Case Number
HCAL1102/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave/refusal and Setting Aside of Ex Parte Order
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed; earlier ex parte order of 23 November 2018 set aside.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cat Protection, Refugee Convention Article 33, Hong Kong Bill of Rights (bor 2 and BOR 3), Leave for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Torture/cat Protection Refugee Convention Article 33 Hong Kong Bill of Rights (bor 2 and BOR 3) +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maddhesia Birendra Kumar

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 / Decision on Leave/refusal and Setting Aside of Ex Parte Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether applicant's facts amount to Convention/Ordinance protection
  3. 3 Whether procedural unfairness (no interview on BOR2, late bundle, no translation, no legal representation) occurred

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave had no reasonable prospect of success because the applicant's allegations did not establish Convention/Ordinance protection, internal protection was available, and the procedural complaints did not demonstrate unfairness; accordingly leave was refused and the application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed; earlier ex parte order of 23 November 2018 set aside.

Orders

  • Order of 23 November 2018 dismissing the application for want of prosecution is set aside
  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused and the application dismissed