SUBBA SOSAL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

SUBBA SOSAL v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

The application for leave was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances under s37ZO that, with prior material, would give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; the Director's findings were neither legally flawed nor Wednesbury unreasonable and there...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3766
Parties
Applicant: Subba Sosal; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 December 2021
Case Number
HCAL1591/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (subsequent Non Refoulement Claim) / Leave Application (dismissed)
Outcome
Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Subsequent Claim, Non Refoulement, Section 37 ZO, Restricted Proceedings Order, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Asylum Law Judicial Review Subsequent Claim Non Refoulement +4 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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Subba Sosal

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (subsequent Non Refoulement Claim) / Leave Application (dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the subsequent non-refoulement claim discloses a significant change of circumstances under section 37ZO to give a realistic prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the Director of Immigration's decision involved error of law, procedural unfairness or was Wednesbury unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether to make a restricted proceedings order against the applicant for potential abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances under s37ZO that, with prior material, would give the subsequent claim a realistic prospect of success; the Director's findings were neither legally flawed nor Wednesbury unreasonable and there was no procedural unfairness.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
  • No restricted proceedings order made at this time; court may consider RPO if the application is restored or further identical proceedings are issued.