MOHAMMAD ESHAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

MOHAMMAD ESHAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Extension of time was refused because the applicant failed to provide an acceptable explanation for an unexplained five-month delay, failed to file the required supporting affidavit, and there were no arguable grounds of appeal from this court's refusal (the intended appeal lacked reasonable prospects and the underlying claim lacked merit), so granting an extension would not be in the interests of justice.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 1705
Parties
Applicant: Mohammad Eshan; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 July 2019
Case Number
HCAL1138/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal to Grant Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons to Extend Time to Appeal (leave Refused)
Outcome
Summons dismissed; leave to appeal out of time refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Appeal Time Limits, Procedural Requirements, Credibility Findings
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement International Human Rights (convention Against Torture) Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Appeal Time Limits +2 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Eshan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Refusal to Grant Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons to Extend Time to Appeal (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time to appeal against refusal to extend time to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided an adequate explanation for delay
  3. 3 Whether the intended appeal has a reasonable prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused because the applicant failed to provide an acceptable explanation for an unexplained five-month delay, failed to file the required supporting affidavit, and there were no arguable grounds of appeal from this court's refusal (the intended appeal lacked reasonable prospects and the underlying claim lacked merit), so granting an extension would not be in the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; leave to appeal out of time refused

Orders

  • Summons filed on 4 July 2019 dismissed.