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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director’s and Board’s decisions, and the findings that the risk was localized, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available meant no substantial grounds for non-refoulement existed.

Citation
[2026] HKCFI 442
Parties
Applicant: Rustinih; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 January 2026
Case Number
HCAL2017/2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic), HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life), HKBOR Article 3 (torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment), Persecution (refugee Convention Article 33), Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Standard of Review, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic) HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life) HKBOR Article 3 (torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment) +4 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rustinih

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are substantial grounds to believe applicant faces real and foreseeable risk of torture or ill-treatment on return to Indonesia
  2. 2 Whether the harm alleged arises from state or non-state actors and whether state protection is available
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Indonesia is reasonable and available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director’s and Board’s decisions, and the findings that the risk was localized, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available meant no substantial grounds for non-refoulement existed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

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