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

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

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable or reasonable prospect of success or any error of law by the Board; the Board lawfully evaluated the evidence and properly concluded the claim was unsubstantiated; extension of time was therefore refused and the leave application dismissed.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1398
Parties
Applicant: Mohammed Saqib; 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
29 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL1777/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Application for Leave Refused; Extension of Time Refused; Application Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time for filing application for leave refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Refoulement, Judicial Review, Extension of Time, State Protection, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Torture Refoulement Judicial Review +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammed Saqib

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to apply for leave should be granted
  2. 2 Whether applicant has reasonable prospect of success on judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the Board erred in law or misapplied facts

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable or reasonable prospect of success or any error of law by the Board; the Board lawfully evaluated the evidence and properly concluded the claim was unsubstantiated; extension of time was therefore refused and the leave application dismissed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Extension of time for application for leave to apply for judicial review refused and the application dismissed
  • If applicant intends to appeal he must first apply to this court within 14 days by way of summons for leave to appeal