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

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

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's findings on risk, state protection and internal relocation were within its factual province and open on the evidence; the Director's Decision is not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 937
Parties
Applicant: Umaeroh; 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
12 April 2024
Case Number
HCAL1455/2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Leave to Apply / Leave Refused (decision on Paper)
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP Risk, Article 2 and Article 3 HKBOR, Persecution Risk Under Refugee Convention Article 33, State Protection and Internal Relocation, Standard of Judicial Review, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Refugee Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Risk Article 2 and Article 3 HKBOR +4 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

Umaeroh

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 Refused (decision on Paper)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board erred in law or acted irrationally or procedurally unfairly in dismissing the appeal
  2. 2 Whether the applicant faces a real risk of torture or CIDTP on return to Indonesia
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a risk to life under Article 2 HKBOR

Ratio Decidendi

Leave refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's Decision; the Board's findings on risk, state protection and internal relocation were within its factual province and open on the evidence; the Director's Decision is not susceptible to judicial review once an appeal to the Board is pursued.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
  • Application dismissed.