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

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

Leave refused because applicants merely challenged the Board's factual findings without demonstrating any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board's findings were supported by the applicants' inconsistent testimony, credible COI and proper application of the law including assessment of state protection and internal relocation, satisfying the enhanced Wednesbury standard and showing no realistic prospect of success for judicial review.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2504
Parties
1st Applicant: Ubongen Leanne Palma; 2nd Applicant (son): Ubongen Chima Obinna; 2nd Applicant (daughter): Ubongen Chioma Esther; 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 September 2023
Case Number
HCAL300/2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Leave Stage Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused (29 September 2023)
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Unified Screening Mechanism, Torture, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Unified Screening Mechanism Torture Internal Relocation +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ubongen Leanne Palma

1st Applicant

Ubongen Chima Obinna

2nd Applicant (son)

Ubongen Chioma Esther

2nd Applicant (daughter)

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 (non Refoulement) / Leave Stage Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law in rejecting non-refoulement claims
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the USM proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the Board's factual findings were irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because applicants merely challenged the Board's factual findings without demonstrating any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board's findings were supported by the applicants' inconsistent testimony, credible COI and proper application of the law including assessment of state protection and internal relocation, satisfying the enhanced Wednesbury standard and showing no realistic prospect of success for judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused (29 September 2023)

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused