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

MARIANA 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 show any reasonable prospect of success: the Director and the Board lawfully considered COI and evidence, reasonably concluded the risk was a one-off incident with viable internal relocation and available state protection, and there was no legal or procedural defect warranting judicial intervention.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1552
Parties
Applicant: Mariana; 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
15 July 2020
Case Number
HCAL1918/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Refused (decision on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Country of Origin Information, Standard of Review, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp State Protection +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mariana

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Refused (decision on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in assessing the risk of harm from the applicant's step-father
  2. 2 Whether reasonable state protection was available and whether the applicant was required to seek it
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation to Surabaya was a viable option

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any reasonable prospect of success: the Director and the Board lawfully considered COI and evidence, reasonably concluded the risk was a one-off incident with viable internal relocation and available state protection, and there was no legal or procedural defect warranting judicial intervention.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

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