TRAN SAU LENH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

TRAN SAU LENH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility finding and its conclusions that the risk was localized, low and defeatable by state protection or internal relocation were open to it and gave the Applicant no prospect of success.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2209
Parties
Applicant: Tran Sau Lenh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 September 2020
Case Number
HCAL743/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (leave Refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic), Article 3 HKBOR Claims, Persecution (refugee Convention Art 33), Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Judicial Review — Leave Stage
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk (immigration Ordinance Part Viic) Article 3 HKBOR Claims Persecution (refugee Convention Art 33) +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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tran Sau Lenh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted with procedural unfairness or irrationality
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant faces a real risk of torture or ill-treatment by a private actor (money-lender) if returned
  3. 3 Whether state protection or reasonable internal relocation in Vietnam is available

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; the Board's adverse credibility finding and its conclusions that the risk was localized, low and defeatable by state protection or internal relocation were open to it and gave the Applicant no prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.