SOHEL AND OTHERS v. WILLIAM LAM, ESQ, TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

SOHEL AND OTHERS v. WILLIAM LAM, ESQ, TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

The court refused to extend time because the applicants had a substantial unexplained delay of four months and their proposed grounds were vague, lacked particulars and had no realistic prospect of success; the Director and the Board had properly considered relevant COI and reasonably concluded the risk was localized with available state protection and internal relocation; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed and the improperly named fourth applicant was deleted.

Citation
[2019] HKCFI 819
Parties
Applicant: Sohel; Applicant: Nur Fitriyah Bt Sakuwan-Nardi; Applicant: Sohel Sajidu Zaman Siam; Putative Respondent: William Lam, Esq; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 May 2019
Case Number
HCAL488/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application
Outcome
Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; fourth applicant deleted from proceedings
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Extension of Time, Procedural Fairness, Country of Origin Information, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Torture Risk Extension of Time +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sohel

Applicant

Nur Fitriyah Bt Sakuwan-Nardi

Applicant

Sohel Sajidu Zaman Siam

Applicant

William Lam, Esq

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Extension of Time and Dismissal of Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for filing the leave application
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have an arguable prospect of success on judicial review
  3. 3 Alleged misdirection in law by the adjudicator regarding past torture as prerequisite

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to extend time because the applicants had a substantial unexplained delay of four months and their proposed grounds were vague, lacked particulars and had no realistic prospect of success; the Director and the Board had properly considered relevant COI and reasonably concluded the risk was localized with available state protection and internal relocation; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed and the improperly named fourth applicant was deleted.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; leave to apply for judicial review dismissed; fourth applicant deleted from proceedings

Orders

  • Sohel Rafiul Zaman Majid be deleted as an applicant from these proceedings
  • An extension of time for the application for leave to apply for judicial review refused