RUSTAM BURHAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

RUSTAM BURHAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The Board's and Director's decisions were lawful and reasonable: the risk of serious harm was assessed as low, there was no evidence of official involvement, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and the applicant failed to identify any legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness; therefore there was no reasonably arguable ground for judicial review and leave was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2766
Parties
Applicant: Rustam Burhan; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
26 October 2023
Case Number
HCAL1988/2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Stage Dismissal
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, HKBOR Articles 2 and 3, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Standard of Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Non Refoulement Torture Risk HKBOR Articles 2 and 3 +3 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rustam Burhan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Leave Stage Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board and Director erred in law or procedure in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of torture, death or other serious harm if returned to Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether state protection or reasonable internal relocation was available

Ratio Decidendi

The Board's and Director's decisions were lawful and reasonable: the risk of serious harm was assessed as low, there was no evidence of official involvement, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and the applicant failed to identify any legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness; therefore there was no reasonably arguable ground for judicial review and leave was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed.