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

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

The application for an extension of time was refused because the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the more than three-month delay and his intended grounds disclosed no realistic prospect of success; the Director and the Board committed no legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture claim, therefore leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 773
Parties
Applicant: Razzaq; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
22 March 2019
Case Number
HCAL831/2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Application for Leave; Application for Extension of Time; Leave Dismissed
Outcome
Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture (article 3 Bor), Refugee Persecution (article 33 Refugee Convention), Judicial Review Procedure, Extension of Time, Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation, State Protection
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture (article 3 Bor) Refugee Persecution (article 33 Refugee Convention) Judicial Review Procedure +4 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Razzaq

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Application for Leave; Application for Extension of Time; Leave Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was good reason to extend time for filing leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's intended grounds disclosed an arguable prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether Director of Immigration and the Torture Claims Appeal Board committed legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in rejecting non-refoulement/torture claims

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was refused because the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the more than three-month delay and his intended grounds disclosed no realistic prospect of success; the Director and the Board committed no legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture claim, therefore leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed