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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error in the Board's decision, confirmed he had a fair hearing, and could not demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success; evaluation of evidence and the merits of the non-refoulement claim are matters for the Director and the Board, not the court.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1290
Parties
Applicant: Sk Danish; 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
24 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL1770/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Risk to Life (hkbor), Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Asylum and Refugee Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Risk to Life (hkbor) Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment +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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sk Danish

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave Application) / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant had an arguable ground to impugn the Board's decision
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had a fair hearing before the Director and the Board
  3. 3 Whether there were substantial grounds to believe the applicant faced risk of torture, death or CIDTP on return

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error in the Board's decision, confirmed he had a fair hearing, and could not demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success; evaluation of evidence and the merits of the non-refoulement claim are matters for the Director and the Board, not the court.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed