SERASINGHE ARACHCHIGE MALANIE v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

SERASINGHE ARACHCHIGE MALANIE 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 identify any error of law or procedural unfairness; the TCAB's factual findings and risk assessment were rational and supported by the evidence, the applicant had ample time to obtain documents, and there was no arguable prospect of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3505
Parties
Applicant: Serasinghe Arachchige Malanie; 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 November 2021
Case Number
HCAL1356/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (decision)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Risk Assessment, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Asylum and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Assessment +4 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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Serasinghe Arachchige Malanie

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application Refused (decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the TCAB erred in law or procedure
  2. 2 Whether there was a real risk of torture or ill-treatment amounting to non-refoulement protection
  3. 3 Whether reasonable state protection was available in Sri Lanka

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any error of law or procedural unfairness; the TCAB's factual findings and risk assessment were rational and supported by the evidence, the applicant had ample time to obtain documents, and there was no arguable prospect of success on claims of real risk, torture or lack of state protection.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused.