OBY AGUIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

OBY AGUIN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions; both bodies reasonably found the risk low, accepted the dispute was private, found state protection and internal relocation available, and the applicant did not adduce sufficient or specific grounds to challenge those findings.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 739
Parties
Applicant: Oby Aguin; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL930/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Leave Test
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Procedural Fairness +1 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oby Aguin

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board and Director erred in law, were irrational, or procedurally unfair in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of torture or inhuman treatment on return (Torture/BOR 2/BOR 3 risk)
  3. 3 Whether state protection was available and internal relocation in Indonesia was reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's and Board's decisions; both bodies reasonably found the risk low, accepted the dispute was private, found state protection and internal relocation available, and the applicant did not adduce sufficient or specific grounds to challenge those findings.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.