MAMUN ABDULLAH AL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

MAMUN ABDULLAH AL 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 identify any arguable legal error and could not show a reasonable prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility and risk assessments were within its primary fact-finding role and there was no basis for the court to intervene.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1365
Parties
Applicant: Mamun Abdullah Al; 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
7 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL1775/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused and the application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Right to Life (bor Article 2), Prohibition of Torture (bor Article 3), Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional and Administrative Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Asylum Law Judicial Review Procedure Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Right to Life (bor Article 2) +5 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mamun Abdullah Al

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 Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has an arguable ground or reasonable prospects of success for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in its evaluation of credibility and risk of torture, CIDTP, violation of right to life or persecution
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation negate non-refoulement risks

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error and could not show a reasonable prospect of success; the Board's adverse credibility and risk assessments were within its primary fact-finding role and there was no basis for the court to intervene.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused and the application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed