RESHAM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

RESHAM v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the Board correctly found it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the late appeal under s37ZR, the Director correctly treated the claim as a subsequent claim under s37ZO and reasonably concluded there was no significant change or realistic prospect of success, the applicant offered no arguable legal error or procedural unfairness, and the judicial review application was out of time with no good reason to extend time.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2125
Parties
Applicant: Resham; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 September 2020
Case Number
HCAL1332/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claim, Asylum, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Claim Asylum Judicial Review +1 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Resham

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board had jurisdiction to entertain the late appeal under section 37ZR of the Immigration Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the Director lawfully treated the claim as a subsequent claim under section 37ZO and correctly refused permission to re-file
  3. 3 Whether the applicant showed a significant change of circumstances and a realistic prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the Board correctly found it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the late appeal under s37ZR, the Director correctly treated the claim as a subsequent claim under s37ZO and reasonably concluded there was no significant change or realistic prospect of success, the applicant offered no arguable legal error or procedural unfairness, and the judicial review application was out of time with no good reason to extend time.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave refused