REHMAN UBAID UR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

REHMAN UBAID UR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

The court refused the extension of time because the applicant was about 5 years and 4 months late, failed to identify any arguable challenge to the Board's decision which found only a private land dispute without state involvement, and thus failed to show a reasonable prospect of success; accordingly extension was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 298
Parties
Applicant: Rehman Ubaid Ur; 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
5 February 2024
Case Number
HCAL521/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons in Chambers
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Non Refoulement Claim, Assessment of Prospects of Success, Service of Court Documents
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Extension of Time Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Non Refoulement Claim Assessment of Prospects of Success +1 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

Rehman Ubaid Ur

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Summons in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an extension of time to file an appeal
  2. 2 Whether the intended appeal has a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was properly served and whether lack of representation justifies extension

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the extension of time because the applicant was about 5 years and 4 months late, failed to identify any arguable challenge to the Board's decision which found only a private land dispute without state involvement, and thus failed to show a reasonable prospect of success; accordingly extension was refused and the application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time refused
  • Application dismissed