RAHMAN SUBAYER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RAHMAN SUBAYER v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's findings on lack of real risk, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were within its...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 576
Parties
Applicant: Rahman Subayer; 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
4 March 2025
Case Number
HCAL2275/2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk State Protection Internal Relocation +2 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rahman Subayer

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or committed procedural unfairness in dismissing the non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real and personal risk of torture or death (Part VIIC Immigration Ordinance; HKBOR Articles 2 and 3)
  3. 3 Whether state protection in India was available and effective

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's findings on lack of real risk, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were within its fact-finding province and the applicant had no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Refuse leave to apply for judicial review of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office decision dated 30 October 2024
  • Dismiss the applicant's leave application