RIZWAN RAJA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

RIZWAN RAJA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant was more than seven months late with no satisfactory explanation, the intended challenge had no arguable merits and no error of law or procedural unfairness was shown in the Director's decision; accordingly leave was dismissed; a RPO was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 474
Parties
Applicant: Rizwan Raja; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
21 February 2023
Case Number
HCAL648/2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (extension Refused; Leave Dismissed; RPO Made)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicant.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claims, Unified Screening Mechanism, Restricted Proceedings Order, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Public Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Claims Unified Screening Mechanism Restricted Proceedings Order +2 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rizwan Raja

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (extension Refused; Leave Dismissed; RPO Made)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for the applicant to seek leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Director lawfully refused permission to make a subsequent non-refoulement/torture claim under section 37ZO Immigration Ordinance
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has shown a significant change of circumstances and a realistic prospect of success for a subsequent claim

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant was more than seven months late with no satisfactory explanation, the intended challenge had no arguable merits and no error of law or procedural unfairness was shown in the Director's decision; accordingly leave was dismissed; a RPO was justified because the applicant persistently sought to re-litigate a finally determined non-refoulement claim, constituting an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicant.

Orders

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