KAMALJEET KAUR AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

KAMALJEET KAUR AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to permit review of the Director's decision after pursuing the statutory appeal, and because the Board's adverse findings on credibility, risk and availability of internal relocation meant the proposed grounds lacked a reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2127
Parties
1st Applicant: Kamaljeet Kaur; 2nd Applicant: Sahota Navjit Singh; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 August 2019
Case Number
HCAL1692/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application Non Refoulement) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Appeal to Statutory Board
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Procedural Fairness +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kamaljeet Kaur

1st Applicant

Sahota Navjit Singh

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application Non Refoulement) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant may seek judicial review of the Director's decision after pursuing appeal to the statutory Board
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness (lack of legal/language assistance; hearing bundle not read) sufficient to vitiate the Board's decision
  3. 3 Whether the Board's adverse credibility findings and assessment of risk were Wednesbury/unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to permit review of the Director's decision after pursuing the statutory appeal, and because the Board's adverse findings on credibility, risk and availability of internal relocation meant the proposed grounds lacked a reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Applicant's application dismissed.