SAGAT MARIANNE TRINIDAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

SAGAT MARIANNE TRINIDAD v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the adjudicator's decision was not shown to be legally flawed or procedurally unfair, the applicant lacked credibility, there was no real risk of torture, CIDTP, persecution or threat to life if returned, and the grounds advanced were unparticularised and not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1269
Parties
1st Applicant: Sagat Marianne Trinidad; 2nd Applicant: Re:S; 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
14 June 2018
Case Number
HCAL558/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Application for Leave (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Refugee Status, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Refugee Status Judicial Review +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sagat Marianne Trinidad

1st Applicant

Re:S

2nd 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 / Decision on Application for Leave (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants face real risk of torture as defined in Immigration Ordinance Part VIIC and Article 1 CAT
  2. 2 Whether applicants face risk of CIDTP under Hong Kong Bill of Rights and ICCPR
  3. 3 Whether applicants have well-founded fear of persecution under 1951 Refugee Convention and Protocol

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the adjudicator's decision was not shown to be legally flawed or procedurally unfair, the applicant lacked credibility, there was no real risk of torture, CIDTP, persecution or threat to life if returned, and the grounds advanced were unparticularised and not reasonably arguable with no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused