NDIAYE DIAFFE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

NDIAYE DIAFFE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the factual findings that the risk was low, that the dispute was a private family matter, that state protection would be available and that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 2368
Parties
Applicant: Ndiaye Diaffe; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 August 2022
Case Number
HCAL604/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Judicial Review Procedural Fairness +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ndiaye Diaffe

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of torture, violation of non-derogable rights, or persecution on return to Senegal
  3. 3 Whether state protection or reasonable internal relocation negated non-refoulement

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the factual findings that the risk was low, that the dispute was a private family matter, that state protection would be available and that reasonable internal relocation existed were supported by evidence and thus did not justify judicial intervention.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.