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

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

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were within its fact‑finding remit and supported by reasons and COI; therefore the applicant did not show a realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 1647
Parties
Applicant: Muhammad Jamil; 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
4 July 2024
Case Number
HCAL1559/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Decision on Application for Leave (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Judicial Review Standards, Leave to Apply Procedure
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp State Protection Internal Relocation +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Jamil

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Decision on Application for Leave (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision was susceptible to judicial review for error of law or procedural unfairness
  2. 2 Whether state protection was available to the applicant
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Pakistan was viable

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were within its fact‑finding remit and supported by reasons and COI; therefore the applicant did not show a realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office Decision dated 14 July 2020 is refused.