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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Form 86 was filed out of time without any satisfactory explanation for the delay and there was no realistic prospect of success on the merits given the Adjudicator had considered the evidence, held an oral hearing and reasonably concluded the risk of harm on...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1930
Parties
Applicant: Srinawati; Applicant: Srinawati Fahzil Akter Rehman; 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
7 August 2020
Case Number
HCAL1051/2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application on the Papers (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Claim, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Overstay
Source Language
en
Immigration Administrative Law Human Rights Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Torture Claim Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time +1 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Srinawati

Applicant

Srinawati Fahzil Akter Rehman

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application on the Papers (leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Form 86 was filed in time and if not whether time should be extended
  2. 2 Whether there is a reasonably arguable/fair prospect of success to justify granting leave
  3. 3 Whether the Adjudicator properly considered risk of harm to mother and child including effect of illegitimacy

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Form 86 was filed out of time without any satisfactory explanation for the delay and there was no realistic prospect of success on the merits given the Adjudicator had considered the evidence, held an oral hearing and reasonably concluded the risk of harm on return was low; accordingly there was no basis to extend time or grant leave.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Matter considered on the papers; no extension of time granted.