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

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

The application was dismissed as out of time and the court refused leave to extend time because the applicant was 12 days late, provided no explanation, and failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable grounds of unlawfulness, unreasonableness or procedural unfairness or any realistic prospect of success in a judicial review challenge to the Director's and Adjudicator's decisions.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1820
Parties
Applicant: Monirul Islam; 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
19 November 2018
Case Number
HCAL798/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Considered on the Papers and Dismissed as Out of Time; Leave to Extend Time Refused; Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Application dismissed as out of time; leave to apply to extend time refused; leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Article 3 HKBORO, Article 2 HKBORO, Refugee Convention Article 33, Judicial Review, Leave and Extension of Time, Unified Screening Mechanism
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Article 3 HKBORO +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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monirul Islam

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 Application Considered on the Papers and Dismissed as Out of Time; Leave to Extend Time Refused; Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to apply for judicial review was filed in time or whether an extension of time should be granted
  2. 2 Whether there were any reasonably arguable grounds of illegality, procedural unfairness or irrationality enabling leave for judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the Director and Adjudicator correctly applied the legal tests for torture/non-refoulement and rights under HKBORO/ICCPR

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed as out of time and the court refused leave to extend time because the applicant was 12 days late, provided no explanation, and failed to demonstrate any reasonably arguable grounds of unlawfulness, unreasonableness or procedural unfairness or any realistic prospect of success in a judicial review challenge to the Director's and Adjudicator's decisions.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed as out of time; leave to apply to extend time refused; leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply to extend time refused
  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused