PHAM VAN NHAM v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

PHAM VAN NHAM v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances under Section 37ZO that, together with previous material, would give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; the Director applied the correct legal tests, made no procedural error, and reasonably concluded...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2733
Parties
Applicant: Pham Van Nham; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 September 2021
Case Number
HCAL1050/2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Stage Refusal
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Subsequent Non Refoulement Claim, Section 37 ZO Immigration Ordinance, Procedural Fairness, Internal Relocation, Abuse of Process, Credibility Findings
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Non Refoulement Law Subsequent Non Refoulement Claim Section 37 ZO Immigration Ordinance Procedural Fairness +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pham Van Nham

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Stage Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided sufficient written evidence of a significant change of circumstances under Section 37ZO to permit a subsequent claim
  2. 2 Whether the Director erred in law or committed procedural unfairness in refusing permission for a subsequent claim
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation in Vietnam was a reasonable alternative

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances under Section 37ZO that, together with previous material, would give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; the Director applied the correct legal tests, made no procedural error, and reasonably concluded internal relocation in Vietnam was available.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • No Restricted Proceedings Order made at this stage