MANJIT SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

MANJIT SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Director and the Board reasonably found the risk to be localized and low, state protection and internal relocation in India were available, and no arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness was identified that would justify judicial review.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1568
Parties
Applicant: Manjit Singh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 June 2021
Case Number
HCAL531/2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Reinstated and Refused on Merits
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review reinstated; leave refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 2, Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 3, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Scope, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 2 Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 3 +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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manjit Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Reinstated and Refused on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Director of Immigration or the Torture Claims Appeal Board erred in law or committed procedural unfairness
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of BOR 2/BOR 3 ill-treatment on return to India

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Director and the Board reasonably found the risk to be localized and low, state protection and internal relocation in India were available, and no arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness was identified that would justify judicial review.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review reinstated; leave refused.

Orders

  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review reinstated.
  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.