SAKATTAR SINGH v. JEREMY GLEN, ESQ. [Decision on Leave Application]

SAKATTAR SINGH v. JEREMY GLEN, ESQ. [Decision on Leave Application]

Under rigorous examination the Adjudicator's findings were supported by the evidence, there was no error of law or procedural unfairness, the applicant failed to show realistic prospects of success and therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 365
Parties
Applicant: Sakattar Singh; Putative Respondent: Adjudicator, Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 February 2019
Case Number
HCAL662/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (non Refoulement/immigration) / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Asylum, Torture, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review, Internal Relocation
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Asylum Torture Procedural Fairness +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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sakattar Singh

Applicant

Adjudicator, Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (non Refoulement/immigration) / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board/Adjudicator's decision involved errors of law or was irrational
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in the screening and appeal process
  3. 3 Adequacy of state protection and viability of internal relocation in India

Ratio Decidendi

Under rigorous examination the Adjudicator's findings were supported by the evidence, there was no error of law or procedural unfairness, the applicant failed to show realistic prospects of success and therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused