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

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

Extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant filed more than three and a half years late without explanation, the delay was serious, and the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's factual findings that the matter was a loan dispute, there was no evidence of torture, state protection was available and internal relocation was viable.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2161
Parties
Applicant: Vu Thi Binh; 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
29 August 2023
Case Number
HCAL332/2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Determination on Extension of Time and Leave Application (papers Only)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture and CIDTP, Internal Relocation, Extension of Time, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Standard of Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture and CIDTP Internal Relocation Extension of Time +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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vu Thi Binh

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 / Determination on Extension of Time and Leave Application (papers Only)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for a late application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the proposed judicial review has a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Appropriate standard of review of factual findings by the Director and the Board

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time was refused and the leave application dismissed because the applicant filed more than three and a half years late without explanation, the delay was serious, and the proposed judicial review had no realistic prospect of success given the Board's factual findings that the matter was a loan dispute, there was no evidence of torture, state protection was available and internal relocation was viable.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for judicial review refused.
  • Application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.