TRAN THI THUY QUYNH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

TRAN THI THUY QUYNH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the applicant had no realistic prospect of success: the Board's factual findings that the matter was a loan dispute, that injuries were not grave, that police protection could not be excluded and that internal relocation was viable were open to the Board and not irrational; the applicant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1007
Parties
Applicant: Tran Thi Thuy Quynh; 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
2 June 2020
Case Number
HCAL1641/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review of a Non Refoulement/torture Claim Decision / Leave Stage – Application for Leave Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, Procedural Impropriety, Internal Relocation, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Procedural Impropriety Internal Relocation +2 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tran Thi Thuy Quynh

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 of a Non Refoulement/torture Claim Decision / Leave Stage – Application for Leave Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's finding that the claimant was involved in a loan dispute rather than at real risk of torture or CIDTP was irrational
  2. 2 Whether the Board committed procedural impropriety by failing to make sufficient inquiry or by relying on Country of Origin Information not set out in its decision
  3. 3 Whether police protection in Vietnam and internal relocation were viable options

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant had no realistic prospect of success: the Board's factual findings that the matter was a loan dispute, that injuries were not grave, that police protection could not be excluded and that internal relocation was viable were open to the Board and not irrational; the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proof on risk and internal relocation.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Director of Immigration deleted as respondent; the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office is the sole respondent