SHEKH MOHAMMAD IQLAZ v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

SHEKH MOHAMMAD IQLAZ v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The Director's decision refusing the subsequent claim was lawful: the applicant failed to show a significant change in circumstances under s37ZO and merely re-litigated previously rejected and unreliable facts; there was no error of law or procedural unfairness and no realistic prospect of success, therefore leave...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2994
Parties
Applicant: Shekh Mohammad Iqlaz; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 October 2021
Case Number
HCAL1270/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application and Application of Restricted Proceedings Order
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicant
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Restricted Proceedings Order, Subsequent Claim Under Unified Screening, Credibility Assessment, Abuse of Process, Section 37 ZO of Immigration Ordinance
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Judicial Review Non Refoulement Restricted Proceedings Order Subsequent Claim Under Unified Screening +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shekh Mohammad Iqlaz

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application and Application of Restricted Proceedings Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director lawfully refused the subsequent non-refoulement claim under s37ZO
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated a significant change of circumstances giving a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is abusing court process by re-litigating prior findings

Ratio Decidendi

The Director's decision refusing the subsequent claim was lawful: the applicant failed to show a significant change in circumstances under s37ZO and merely re-litigated previously rejected and unreliable facts; there was no error of law or procedural unfairness and no realistic prospect of success, therefore leave to apply for judicial review was refused and a Restricted Proceedings Order was necessary to prevent abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed; Restricted Proceedings Order made against the applicant

Orders

  • Applicant prohibited from commencing or continuing any proceedings relating to any non-refoulement claim in the High Court without leave of the Court of First Instance
  • All leave applications to be made to the Judge in charge of the Constitutional and Administrative Law List or designated Judge