NURSANTI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS [Decision on Leave Application]

NURSANTI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable grounds of error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board reasonably accepted key facts but properly found state protection and internal relocation available and therefore there was no reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 695
Parties
Applicant: Nursanti; 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
19 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL1299/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application Considered on Paper; Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave refused and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Persecution, Internal Relocation, State Protection, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Persecution +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 7 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nursanti

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application Considered on Paper; Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or committed procedural unfairness in rejecting non-refoulement/torture/Article 2/Article 3 claims
  2. 2 Whether there were substantial grounds for believing the applicant faced real risk of harm from creditor on return
  3. 3 Whether state protection was available and internal relocation viable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable grounds of error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board reasonably accepted key facts but properly found state protection and internal relocation available and therefore there was no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave refused and application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused and application dismissed