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

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

The court dismissed the leave application: the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law or procedural unfairness that would give rise to a realistic prospect of success, the second application repeated substantially the same grounds already refused and was an abuse of process barred by res judicata, and therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 1567
Parties
Applicant: Shariful Islam; 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
17 August 2018
Case Number
HCAL917/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; second application dismissed as abuse of process and barred by res judicata
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claim, Procedural Fairness, Res Judicata, Standard of Proof, Country of Origin Information (coi), Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Claim Procedural Fairness Res Judicata +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shariful Islam

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 / Decision on Leave Application (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board breached procedural fairness by late provision of hearing bundle and lack of interpretation
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator irrationally ignored or misapplied COI and evidence
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator applied incorrect standard of proof

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed the leave application: the applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law or procedural unfairness that would give rise to a realistic prospect of success, the second application repeated substantially the same grounds already refused and was an abuse of process barred by res judicata, and therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; second application dismissed as abuse of process and barred by res judicata

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed
  • Second application dismissed as an abuse of court process and barred by res judicata