VU THI CUC v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

VU THI CUC v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions; both decision-makers reasonably found the risk was localized and low, state protection and internal relocation were available, and thus...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 2711
Parties
Applicant: Vu Thi Cuc; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
19 October 2023
Case Number
HCAL1534/2023
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, Internal Relocation, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Risk Assessment
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Internal Relocation Judicial Review +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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vu Thi Cuc

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 Director and the Board erred in law or acted irrationally in rejecting the Applicant's non-refoulement claim
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant faces a real risk of torture, death or other serious harm from private actors on return
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation in Vietnam are available and reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions; both decision-makers reasonably found the risk was localized and low, state protection and internal relocation were available, and thus there was no prospect of success on a judicial review which is not a forum for rehearing factual assessments.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused