MUHAMMAD JAMSHIED v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

MUHAMMAD JAMSHIED v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Refused extension of time because delay of almost one year was serious with no explanation, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated, that police protection and internal relocation were viable, and the applicant produced only unsubstantiated allegations; accordingly the application was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2222
Parties
Applicant: Muhammad Jamshied; 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
12 September 2023
Case Number
HCAL1452/2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal / Summons for Extension of Time Determined on Paper; Interlocutory Application Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time refused and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Non Refoulement Claim, Risk of Torture, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Prospect of Success
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Law Procedural Law Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Non Refoulement Claim +4 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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Jamshied

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal / Summons for Extension of Time Determined on Paper; Interlocutory Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time should be granted for filing the notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Board and Director acted unfairly in reaching their decision
  3. 3 Whether there is a realistic prospect of success in the intended appeal on non-refoulement grounds

Ratio Decidendi

Refused extension of time because delay of almost one year was serious with no explanation, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated, that police protection and internal relocation were viable, and the applicant produced only unsubstantiated allegations; accordingly the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused and application dismissed

Orders

  • Extension of time to file notice of appeal refused
  • Application for leave / extension dismissed