RAJ NARAYAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

RAJ NARAYAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

The adjudicator and Director properly evaluated the evidence and law and correctly found the applicant failed to establish a real risk of torture, CIDTP or persecution; state protection and internal relocation were viable on the applicant's own evidence; there was no procedural unfairness or legal error and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable, therefore the grounds were not reasonably arguable and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 636
Parties
Applicant: Raj Narayan; 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
21 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL679/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused at Leave Stage
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (cidtp), Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review (leave), Internal Relocation, Country of Origin Information (coi), Credibility Assessment, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Bill of Rights Ordinance, ICCPR, Refugee Convention
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law International Law Non Refoulement Torture +10 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raj Narayan

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 Application Refused at Leave Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant faced real risk of torture as defined in Part VIIC of the Immigration Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether applicant faced real risk of CIDTP or risk to right to life under Hong Kong Bill of Rights/ICCPR
  3. 3 Whether applicant had a well founded fear of persecution under the 1951 Refugee Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator and Director properly evaluated the evidence and law and correctly found the applicant failed to establish a real risk of torture, CIDTP or persecution; state protection and internal relocation were viable on the applicant's own evidence; there was no procedural unfairness or legal error and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable, therefore the grounds were not reasonably arguable and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.