UDDIN MD NASIR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

UDDIN MD NASIR 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 Director’s and Board’s decisions; the Board’s adverse credibility findings were supported by evidence and reasoning; COI and internal relocation findings were rational; there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2055
Parties
Applicant: Uddin Md Nasir; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 August 2020
Case Number
HCAL1491/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Application (refused)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Findings, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review Leave
Source Language
EN
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Procedural Fairness Credibility Findings +2 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uddin Md Nasir

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 (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator misdirected herself by requiring past torture to infer future risk
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the handling of Country of Origin Information (COI) and failure to investigate COI
  3. 3 Whether the Board irrationally failed to weigh or improperly cherry-picked COI

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Director’s and Board’s decisions; the Board’s adverse credibility findings were supported by evidence and reasoning; COI and internal relocation findings were rational; there was no prospect of success on judicial review.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused