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

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

The applicant lacked any arguable legal ground because the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated, that state protection and internal relocation were available, and that the applicant lacked credibility were not legally flawed, procedurally unfair or Wednesbury irrational; therefore the applicant had no reasonable prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 424
Parties
Applicant: Sumi; 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
23 February 2021
Case Number
HCAL1138/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage (application for Leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Risk to Life (bor Article 2), Asylum/persecution (refugee Convention Article 33), State Protection, Internal Relocation, Credibility Findings, Judicial Review Standard of Review (wednesbury/irrationality), Procedural Fairness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (order 53 Rhc)
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee and Non Refoulement Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Risk to Life (bor Article 2) +7 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

Sumi

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 / Leave Stage (application for Leave Refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted procedurally unfairly or irrationally in rejecting the applicant's non-refoulement/torture/Article 2/Article 3/refugee claims
  2. 2 Whether there was a real risk of harm from private actors (husband and Rahman) on return to Bangladesh
  3. 3 Whether state protection or internal relocation rendered the risk insubstantial

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant lacked any arguable legal ground because the Board's findings that the claim was unsubstantiated, that state protection and internal relocation were available, and that the applicant lacked credibility were not legally flawed, procedurally unfair or Wednesbury irrational; therefore the applicant had no reasonable prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review is refused.
  • The applicant's application is dismissed.