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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were within its assessment province...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 443
Parties
Applicant: Tran Cong Du; 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 March 2023
Case Number
HCAL740/2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application (consideration on Paper)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, HKBOR Article 2 and Article 3, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Judicial Review Standards (wednesbury/unreasonableness)
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Refugee and Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk HKBOR Article 2 and Article 3 State Protection +3 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tran Cong Du

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Leave Application / Leave Application (consideration on Paper)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally in rejecting the non-refoulement/torture claim
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness occurred in the Board's hearing
  3. 3 Whether the Board's factual findings on credibility, state protection and internal relocation were open to judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusions on state protection and internal relocation were within its assessment province and did not give rise to a realistic prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Application dismissed