SHRESTHA MUKESH DAS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

SHRESTHA MUKESH DAS v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant's complaints were not reasonably arguable: the Adjudicator's findings on credibility, state protection and internal relocation were supported by the record and not Wednesbury unreasonable; there was no procedural unfairness in interpretation/translation or in time to prepare; and judicial review could not be used to re‑assess matters within the Board's primary fact‑finding role.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 975
Parties
Applicant: Shrestha Mukesh Das; 1st Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office; 2nd Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 April 2019
Case Number
HCAL1021/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement Screening) / Leave Stage — Application for Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Persecution Risk, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Interpretation / Translation, Standard of Review, Credibility Assessment, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Constitutional and Administrative Law Asylum / Refugee Law Criminal / Torture Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Persecution Risk +7 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shrestha Mukesh Das

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

1st Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement Screening) / Leave Stage — Application for Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision was susceptible to judicial review at the leave stage
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant was denied procedural fairness (translation/interpretation, time to prepare)
  3. 3 Whether the Adjudicator's credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant's complaints were not reasonably arguable: the Adjudicator's findings on credibility, state protection and internal relocation were supported by the record and not Wednesbury unreasonable; there was no procedural unfairness in interpretation/translation or in time to prepare; and judicial review could not be used to re‑assess matters within the Board's primary fact‑finding role.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.