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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; both decision-makers reasonably concluded the risk was localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and thus there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2188
Parties
Applicant: Shamsul Mohammad; 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
HCAL723/2018
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, Procedural Fairness, Internal Relocation, Standard of Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration and Asylum Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture Risk Procedural Fairness Internal Relocation +1 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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shamsul Mohammad

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board and Director erred in law or acted unfairly in rejecting the applicant's non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or violation of non-derogable rights on return
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Bangladesh is viable and would avoid risk

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; both decision-makers reasonably concluded the risk was localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and thus there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused