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

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

The application for leave is dismissed because the underlying non-refoulement claim was rejected by the Director and affirmed by the Board on findings of low risk, available state protection and feasible internal relocation, the applicant failed to provide requested further facts and subsequently sought to withdraw such that there is no live basis for the leave application.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2315
Parties
Applicant: Shabuddin; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 September 2020
Case Number
HCAL86/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave (application Dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture, Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 3 (prohibition of Torture), Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 2 (right to Life), 1951 Refugee Convention Article 33 (non Refoulement), Internal Relocation/state Protection, Procedural Requirements for Leave
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 3 (prohibition of Torture) Hong Kong Bill of Rights Article 2 (right to Life) +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 6 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shabuddin

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 (application Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment on return
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a risk of persecution engaging Article 33 1951 Convention
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation and state protection are available and effective

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave is dismissed because the underlying non-refoulement claim was rejected by the Director and affirmed by the Board on findings of low risk, available state protection and feasible internal relocation, the applicant failed to provide requested further facts and subsequently sought to withdraw such that there is no live basis for the leave application.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

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