SRI MAULIDAH BT SUKANTA IJOL AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

SRI MAULIDAH BT SUKANTA IJOL AND ANOTHER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the Board and Director had carried out proper, reasoned, and separate assessments of both mother’s and child’s non-refoulement claims; no error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness was identified; COI supported availability of internal relocation and state protection; the minor’s claim was adequately considered despite lack of representation, so there was no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2121
Parties
1st Applicant: Sri Maulidah Bt Sukanta Ijol; 2nd Applicant: Hossain Sumaia; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 August 2023
Case Number
HCAL358/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to amend Form 86 to include the daughter granted; leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life), HKBOR Article 3 (no Torture or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment), Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Leave, Minor Specific Claims
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee/non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life) +5 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 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sri Maulidah Bt Sukanta Ijol

1st Applicant

Hossain Sumaia

2nd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board and Director committed error of law or procedural unfairness in rejecting non-refoulement claims
  2. 2 Whether the minor’s claim was properly considered separately and achieved high standard of fairness given lack of representation
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation or state protection negated risk of refoulement/torture

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the Board and Director had carried out proper, reasoned, and separate assessments of both mother’s and child’s non-refoulement claims; no error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness was identified; COI supported availability of internal relocation and state protection; the minor’s claim was adequately considered despite lack of representation, so there was no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend Form 86 to include the daughter granted; leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to amend Form 86 to include the 2nd Applicant (Hossain Sumaia) granted
  • Leave for the Applicants to apply for judicial review refused