RASHEED USMAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

RASHEED USMAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Refusal to grant extension of time because applicant did not provide a satisfactory or prompt explanation for the delay, had been receiving official communications, and the underlying judicial review had no reasonably arguable basis or realistic prospect of success; granting an extension would not be in the interests of justice.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 915
Parties
Applicant: Rasheed Usman; 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 April 2019
Case Number
HCAL1096/2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Extension of Time to Appeal / Chambers Decision Refusing Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Summons dismissed; extension of time to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Judicial Review, Non Refoulement, Procedural Time Limits, Interlocutory Appeal
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Immigration Law Human Rights Convention Against Torture Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Judicial Review Non Refoulement +2 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

Rasheed Usman

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Extension of Time to Appeal / Chambers Decision Refusing Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant extension of time to appeal against refusal of leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay
  3. 3 Whether there is a reasonably arguable basis/realistic prospect of success in the underlying judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

Refusal to grant extension of time because applicant did not provide a satisfactory or prompt explanation for the delay, had been receiving official communications, and the underlying judicial review had no reasonably arguable basis or realistic prospect of success; granting an extension would not be in the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; extension of time to appeal refused

Orders

  • The applicant's summons dated 24 January 2019 dismissed.