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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant had already pursued an earlier leave application that was dismissed, the present application lacked particulars and merit, the applicant had a full oral hearing before the Board with credibility findings against him, and the re-run constituted an abuse of the court process barred by res judicata.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1981
Parties
Applicant: Rowson Rahman; 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
31 August 2018
Case Number
HCAL1057/2017
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Non Refoulement/torture Appeal Decision / Decision on Application for Leave (leave Dismissed)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Article 3 HKBOR, Res Judicata/abuse of Process, Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Article 3 HKBOR Res Judicata/abuse of Process +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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rowson Rahman

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Non Refoulement/torture Appeal Decision / Decision on Application for Leave (leave Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board’s decision was affected by procedural unfairness in disclosure and representation
  2. 2 Whether the Board irrationally failed to consider or give proper weight to country of origin information (COI) and state protection
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator applied incorrect standard of proof or failed to make necessary inquiries (psychological/psychiatric)

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant had already pursued an earlier leave application that was dismissed, the present application lacked particulars and merit, the applicant had a full oral hearing before the Board with credibility findings against him, and the re-run constituted an abuse of the court process barred by res judicata.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed