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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the application was both time-barred and without realistic prospects of success: the Board's findings on credibility, availability of state protection and internal relocation were lawful and not Wednesbury unreasonable, and the Director's decision was superseded by the Board's Decision.

Citation
[2022] HKCFI 1982
Parties
1st Applicant: Anny Teti; 2nd Applicant: Bah Mustaqiimah; 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
29 June 2022
Case Number
HCAL593/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Stage (application for Leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; joint application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Risk to Life (article 2 Hkbor), CIDTP (article 3 Hkbor), Judicial Review Leave, Extension of Time/delay, State Protection and Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk to Life (article 2 Hkbor) CIDTP (article 3 Hkbor) +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anny Teti

1st Applicant

Bah Mustaqiimah

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 (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Stage (application for Leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director's decision remained amenable to judicial review once appeal to the Board was pursued
  2. 2 Whether extension of time to apply for leave should be granted
  3. 3 Whether the applicants had a realistic prospect of success on judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the application was both time-barred and without realistic prospects of success: the Board's findings on credibility, availability of state protection and internal relocation were lawful and not Wednesbury unreasonable, and the Director's decision was superseded by the Board's Decision.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; joint application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Applicants' joint application dismissed