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

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

The leave application was refused because the applicant's grounds were broad, vague and lacked particulars, and the Director and the Board gave adequate reasons; their findings that the risk was localized, of low intensity, remote given lapse of time and that internal relocation and state protection were available...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 2666
Parties
Applicant: Novianti; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 December 2019
Case Number
HCAL1042/2018
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement / Immigration) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/article 3 HKBOR, Right to Life/article 2 HKBOR, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Country of Origin Information
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture/article 3 HKBOR Right to Life/article 2 HKBOR Internal Relocation +3 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Novianti

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement / Immigration) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are substantial grounds to believe the applicant faces real risk of torture or violation of non-derogable rights on return
  2. 2 Whether past domestic abuse and threats by private actors engage non-refoulement or Article 3 risks
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation in Indonesia is a reasonable alternative

Ratio Decidendi

The leave application was refused because the applicant's grounds were broad, vague and lacked particulars, and the Director and the Board gave adequate reasons; their findings that the risk was localized, of low intensity, remote given lapse of time and that internal relocation and state protection were available were not legally flawed, irrational or procedurally unfair, so there was no realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused