RAGAB FATHELBAB RAGAB ABDALLA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

RAGAB FATHELBAB RAGAB ABDALLA v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for leave was refused because the Board's decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the applicant's evidence was inconsistent and not credible; there were no substantial grounds to believe a real risk of torture, death or CIDTP existed on return and state protection and internal relocation remained viable, such that the intended judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 546
Parties
Applicant: Ragab Fathelbab Ragab Abdalla; 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
8 March 2021
Case Number
HCAL1180/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claims, Risk Assessment, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Claims Risk Assessment State Protection +3 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ragab Fathelbab Ragab Abdalla

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted procedurally unfairly in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether there were substantial grounds to believe the applicant faced a real and substantial risk of torture, death or CIDTP from private actors on return
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection or viable internal relocation in Egypt was available to the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave was refused because the Board's decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the applicant's evidence was inconsistent and not credible; there were no substantial grounds to believe a real risk of torture, death or CIDTP existed on return and state protection and internal relocation remained viable, such that the intended judicial review had no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed