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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that risk was localized and that internal relocation was reasonable were rational, supported by evidence and not for the court to re-evaluate on judicial review.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 88
Parties
Applicant: Shafique; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 January 2020
Case Number
HCAL404/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Credibility Findings Internal Relocation +2 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

Shafique

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Board's adverse credibility finding was reviewable on judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or non-derogable rights violations if returned to Pakistan

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director's or Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions that risk was localized and that internal relocation was reasonable were rational, supported by evidence and not for the court to re-evaluate on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.