RAHMAN MOJIBUR v. FRASER SYME, ESQ., TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

RAHMAN MOJIBUR v. FRASER SYME, ESQ., TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality with sufficient particularity; the Board's adverse credibility findings and risk assessment fell squarely within the primary decision-maker's role and were supported by reasoned analysis and COI, and the Applicant's grounds were broad, vague and unparticularised and therefore not reasonably arguable.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 453
Parties
Applicant: Rahman Mojibur; Putative Respondent: Fraser SYME, Esq., Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: The Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL1281/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic), HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life), HKBOR Article 3 (prohibition of Torture/inhuman Treatment), 1951 Refugee Convention Article 33, Credibility Findings, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Standard (leave Stage)
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic) HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life) HKBOR Article 3 (prohibition of Torture/inhuman Treatment) +5 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rahman Mojibur

Applicant

Fraser SYME, Esq., Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator misdirected himself by requiring past torture to infer future risk
  2. 2 Whether the Board failed to consider or took improper account of Country of Origin Information
  3. 3 Whether the Board irrationally failed to assess existence of a pattern of gross or mass violations in Bangladesh

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality with sufficient particularity; the Board's adverse credibility findings and risk assessment fell squarely within the primary decision-maker's role and were supported by reasoned analysis and COI, and the Applicant's grounds were broad, vague and unparticularised and therefore not reasonably arguable.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.