TRINH THI LY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

TRINH THI LY v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board conducted a comprehensive assessment, gave adequate reasons for adverse credibility findings, and there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in its decision; the applicant therefore lacked a realistic prospect of success.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 3447
Parties
Applicant: Trinh Thi Ly; 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
22 November 2021
Case Number
HCAL1270/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, Persecution, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Credibility Findings, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Source Language
en
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Persecution Leave to Apply for Judicial Review +5 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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trinh Thi Ly

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or committed procedural unfairness in dismissing the appeal
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture, CIDTP or persecution if returned
  3. 3 Whether state protection would be available to the applicant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Board conducted a comprehensive assessment, gave adequate reasons for adverse credibility findings, and there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in its decision; the applicant therefore lacked a realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused
  • Applicant's application dismissed