SRI LESTARI HANDAYANI v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

SRI LESTARI HANDAYANI 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 demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success: the Board's adverse factual findings were not shown to be legally flawed, and there was no demonstrated error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's assessment that there was no real and substantial risk or that state protection/internal relocation were available.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1851
Parties
Applicant: Sri Lestari Handayani; 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
4 August 2020
Case Number
HCAL1900/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Application for Leave (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, Asylum/refugee Status, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Risk Assessment, State Protection, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Asylum/refugee Status Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +4 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sri Lestari Handayani

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there were substantial grounds for a real and substantial risk of torture, CIDTP or persecution if returned to Indonesia
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in law, was procedurally unfair or irrational in its fact-finding and risk assessment
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection or internal relocation were available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success: the Board's adverse factual findings were not shown to be legally flawed, and there was no demonstrated error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's assessment that there was no real and substantial risk or that state protection/internal relocation were available.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed