PANDI GURMEET SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

PANDI GURMEET SINGH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success; the Board's findings that there was no real or substantial risk on return, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were within its fact finding remit and not legally undermined by error, irrationality or procedural unfairness.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2617
Parties
Applicant: Pandi Gurmeet Singh; 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
31 October 2023
Case Number
HCAL1199/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Risk Assessment, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Risk Assessment +4 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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pandi Gurmeet Singh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally or procedurally unfairly in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether there is a real and substantial risk of torture, death or CIDTP on return
  3. 3 Availability of state protection in India

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any realistic prospect of success; the Board's findings that there was no real or substantial risk on return, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were within its fact finding remit and not legally undermined by error, irrationality or procedural unfairness.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed