SHEIKH MD ROMJAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

SHEIKH MD ROMJAN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER [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 the Board's decisions; the decisions reasonably found the risk was private and localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and therefore there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2229
Parties
Applicant: Sheikh MD Romjan; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
3 September 2020
Case Number
HCAL830/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave, Procedural Fairness, Country of Origin Information
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheikh MD Romjan

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director and the Torture Claims Appeal Board erred in assessing the applicant's risk of harm
  2. 2 Whether private family disputes qualify for non-refoulement protection or torture risk
  3. 3 Whether state/police protection and internal relocation are available and reasonable

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 the Board's decisions; the decisions reasonably found the risk was private and localized, state protection and internal relocation were available, and therefore 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