TARUN KUMAR v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

TARUN KUMAR v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was granted because it was reasonably arguable that the Director erred in treating the Applicant’s asserted fear as mere speculation and failed properly or sufficiently to consider relevant COI on anti-conversion laws and related risks, such that the s37ZO assessment and Wednesbury standard were arguable errors meeting the threshold for leave.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 901
Parties
Applicant: Tarun Kumar; Putative Respondent: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 March 2024
Case Number
HCAL2239/2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (leave Granted)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review granted
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Subsequent Claim Under S37 ZO, Anti Conversion Laws, Country of Origin Information (coi), Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Procedural Fairness, Risk of Torture and Persecution
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Subsequent Claim Under S37 ZO Anti Conversion Laws Country of Origin Information (coi) +3 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarun Kumar

Applicant

Director of Immigration

Putative Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director lawfully refused permission to lodge a subsequent non-refoulement claim under s37ZO of the Immigration Ordinance
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant’s conversion to Islam and disinheritance constitute a significant change of circumstances giving a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the Director properly considered relevant Country of Origin Information and evidence of risk from anti-conversion laws and extremist actors

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because it was reasonably arguable that the Director erred in treating the Applicant’s asserted fear as mere speculation and failed properly or sufficiently to consider relevant COI on anti-conversion laws and related risks, such that the s37ZO assessment and Wednesbury standard were arguable errors meeting the threshold for leave.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review granted

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review granted
  • Applicant to issue the Originating Summons within 14 days from the date of the decision in accordance with Order 53, rule 5 of the Rules of the High Court (Cap. 4A)