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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury‑level irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings, and its conclusions that state protection and internal relocation were available and that the alleged ill‑treatment lacked sufficient severity, were open to the Board and not susceptible to successful judicial review.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2205
Parties
Applicant: Sarki Rita; 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
29 August 2023
Case Number
HCAL657/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of Administrative Immigration Decision / Application for Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life), Article 3 HKBOR (cidtp), Persecution Under Refugee Convention Article 33, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Judicial Review Standards (wednesbury/irrationality), Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture Article 2 HKBOR (right to Life) +7 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarki Rita

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 Administrative Immigration Decision / Application for Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted with procedural unfairness in rejecting the applicant's non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faced a real risk of torture, death or CIDTP on return
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection or internal relocation was available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or Wednesbury‑level irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings, and its conclusions that state protection and internal relocation were available and that the alleged ill‑treatment lacked sufficient severity, were open to the Board and not susceptible to successful judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed