MARINA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

MARINA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions; adverse credibility findings and the availability of internal relocation were rationally reached and determinative of the non-refoulement claim.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 738
Parties
Applicant: Marina; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL841/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, State Acquiescence, Credibility Assessment, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture State Acquiescence Credibility Assessment +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marina

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director and the Board failed to properly assess state acquiescence and due diligence by authorities
  2. 2 Whether the decision-makers improperly ignored or selectively relied on Country of Origin Information (COI)
  3. 3 Whether procedural unfairness arose from insufficient inquiry or opportunity to adduce evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions; adverse credibility findings and the availability of internal relocation were rationally reached and determinative of the non-refoulement claim.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused