PHAM THI HONG DUYEN AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

PHAM THI HONG DUYEN AND OTHERS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was dismissed because applicants failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board provided cogent adverse credibility findings and correctly applied legal principles including availability of internal relocation,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 2252
Parties
1st Applicant: Pham Thi Hong Duyen; 2nd Applicant: Truong Cong Khai; 3rd Applicant: Pham Truong Gia Han; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 April 2026
Case Number
HCAL2437/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Findings, Country of Origin Information, Internal Relocation, Torture, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Judicial Review Procedural Fairness Credibility Findings +4 more

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pham Thi Hong Duyen

1st Applicant

Truong Cong Khai

2nd Applicant

Pham Truong Gia Han

3rd Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally in rejecting the non-refoulement claims
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in the Board's handling of evidence and questioning
  3. 3 Whether the Board or Director failed to give proper weight to Country of Origin Information and state acquiescence

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was dismissed because applicants failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board provided cogent adverse credibility findings and correctly applied legal principles including availability of internal relocation, and the applicants' grounds were vague and lacking particulars such that judicial review was not reasonably arguable.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • The 1st, 2nd and 3rd Applicants' application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed.