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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the evidence supported the findings that the risk was localized and low, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and lack of counsel at the Board stage did not render the process unfair.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 145
Parties
Applicant: Sharma Krishna Prasad; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: The Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 May 2020
Case Number
HCAL1098/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Administrative Decision (non Refoulement/torture Risk) / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture (part VIIC, Immigration Ordinance), HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life), HKBOR Article 3 (prohibition of Torture/ill Treatment), State Protection Assessment, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Right to Legal Representation, Standard of Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture (part Viic, Immigration Ordinance) HKBOR Article 2 (right to Life) +6 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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharma Krishna Prasad

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

The Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Administrative Decision (non Refoulement/torture Risk) / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director and the Board erred in law or committed procedural unfairness in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the absence of legal representation at the Board stage rendered the proceedings unfair
  3. 3 Whether the Director and the Board improperly used or failed to properly balance Country of Origin Information (COI) in assessing state protection

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions; the evidence supported the findings that the risk was localized and low, state protection and reasonable internal relocation were available, and lack of counsel at the Board stage did not render the process unfair.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.