PHAM VAN HANH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

PHAM VAN HANH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD

Refusal to extend time and dismissal of leave application because the 11-week delay was substantial with no satisfactory explanation, the intended judicial review disclosed no reasonably arguable grounds of legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions, and the Board's conclusions that the risk was localized and internal relocation and state protection were available were open to them on the evidence.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 1187
Parties
Applicant: Pham Van Hanh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
30 April 2021
Case Number
HCAL1153/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Leave Application
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Extension of Time Judicial Review +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pham Van Hanh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for an out-of-time application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the proposed judicial review has any reasonably arguable merits
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or other inhuman treatment if returned

Ratio Decidendi

Refusal to extend time and dismissal of leave application because the 11-week delay was substantial with no satisfactory explanation, the intended judicial review disclosed no reasonably arguable grounds of legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions, and the Board's conclusions that the risk was localized and internal relocation and state protection were available were open to them on the evidence.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for filing the application for leave refused
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed