SUNARSIH v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

SUNARSIH v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions: the risks alleged were localised, COI supported reasonable internal relocation, there was no evidential basis that BOR2/BOR3 or torture risks would be violated, and absence of translation or continued legal representation did not render the process unfair; therefore no real prospect of success was shown.

Citation
[2018] HKCFI 2299
Parties
Applicant: Sunarsih; 1st Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration; 2nd Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Case Number
HCAL306/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (administrative/immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, BOR 2 (right to Life), BOR 3 (torture/inhuman or Degrading Treatment), Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Legal Representation, Translation/interpreter Issues, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Asylum Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk BOR 2 (right to Life) +6 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunarsih

Applicant

Director of Immigration

1st Putative Respondent

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office

2nd Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (administrative/immigration/non Refoulement) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director and the Board erred in law or acted unfairly in assessing non-refoulement/torture/BOR risks
  2. 2 Whether the claimed ill-treatment was sufficiently real or was localised and amenable to internal relocation
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness was breached by lack of legal representation or translation

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions: the risks alleged were localised, COI supported reasonable internal relocation, there was no evidential basis that BOR2/BOR3 or torture risks would be violated, and absence of translation or continued legal representation did not render the process unfair; therefore no real prospect of success was shown.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.