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

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

The Board gave adequate reasons, found fundamental and irreconcilable inconsistencies between the applicants' accounts and concluded the claims were inventions; because the applicants could not establish a factual foundation or a reasonable prospect of success, leave to apply for judicial review was properly refused.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 3139
Parties
Applicant (1st): Nguyen Lan Huong; Applicant (2nd): Nguyen Thu Hang; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
27 December 2019
Case Number
HCAL1660/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Risk to Life (bor Article 2), Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (bor Article 3), Credibility Assessment, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Risk to Life (bor Article 2) +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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nguyen Lan Huong

Applicant (1st)

Nguyen Thu Hang

Applicant (2nd)

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision was unfair and procedurally defective
  2. 2 Whether there was a reasonable prospect of success to justify granting leave for judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the Director and Board properly assessed risks under Part VIIC Immigration Ordinance, BOR s8 and Article 33 Refugee Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Board gave adequate reasons, found fundamental and irreconcilable inconsistencies between the applicants' accounts and concluded the claims were inventions; because the applicants could not establish a factual foundation or a reasonable prospect of success, leave to apply for judicial review was properly refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Application dismissed.