PANERGALIN CELSO ARTIPICIO v. MARY YUEN, ESQ., TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

PANERGALIN CELSO ARTIPICIO v. MARY YUEN, ESQ., TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility finding was rationally based on COI and applicant concessions, the risk was localized with available state protection and reasonable internal relocation, and there was no demonstrable procedural unfairness producing an arguable case for judicial review.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 196
Parties
Applicant: Panergalin Celso Artipicio; Putative Respondent / Torture Claims Appeal Board: Mary Yuen, ESQ.; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Case Number
HCAL397/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Leave Application Stage — Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Procedural Fairness, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Torture Risk, Article 3 HKBOR, Article 2 HKBOR, Article 33 Refugee Convention, Judicial Review Leave Threshold
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Asylum and Non Refoulement Law Credibility Assessment Procedural Fairness State Protection +6 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Panergalin Celso Artipicio

Applicant

Mary Yuen, ESQ.

Putative Respondent / Torture Claims Appeal Board

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Leave Application Stage — Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board committed procedural impropriety or unfairness
  2. 2 Whether the Board irrationally or perversely assessed credibility and COI
  3. 3 Whether the Board failed to take into account relevant up-to-date COI

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility finding was rationally based on COI and applicant concessions, the risk was localized with available state protection and reasonable internal relocation, and there was no demonstrable procedural unfairness producing an arguable case for judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused (29 March 2019)