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

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

Extension of time was refused because the applicant's Form 86 was filed about five months late, the applicant could not show any reasonable prospect of success on judicial review, the Board's adverse credibility and evidential findings were within its primary fact-finding remit and disclosed no legal error, and the applicant was found to have been treated fairly; accordingly leave was denied and the application dismissed.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 941
Parties
Applicant: MD Ashad Hossain; 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
27 May 2020
Case Number
HCAL1761/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage; Application for Extension of Time and Leave Refused; Application Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp Risk, Extension of Time for Judicial Review, Judicial Review Leave, Evaluation of Evidence by Administrative Decision Makers
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Asylum Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Risk Extension of Time for Judicial Review Judicial Review Leave +1 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MD Ashad Hossain

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 / Leave Stage; Application for Extension of Time and Leave Refused; Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the intended judicial review has a reasonable prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the Board committed errors of law in its assessment of evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused because the applicant's Form 86 was filed about five months late, the applicant could not show any reasonable prospect of success on judicial review, the Board's adverse credibility and evidential findings were within its primary fact-finding remit and disclosed no legal error, and the applicant was found to have been treated fairly; accordingly leave was denied and the application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • If applicant intends to appeal he must first apply to this court within 14 days by way of summons for leave to appeal.
  • When filing the application for leave to appeal the applicant must file written submissions of not more than 5 pages in support.