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

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

The court refused to extend time because the applicant's delay of over 45 months was excessive and unexplained and there was no reasonably arguable case of legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions (which reasonably found a private monetary dispute, availability...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] HKCFI 2464
Parties
Applicant: Vu Thi Giang; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
24 August 2021
Case Number
HCAL940/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Leave Application Refused and Application Dismissed on Notification (no Oral Hearing)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Risk of Torture/article 3 HKBOR, Right to Life/article 2 HKBOR, Internal Relocation, Extension of Time for Judicial Review, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Risk of Torture/article 3 HKBOR Right to Life/article 2 HKBOR Internal Relocation +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vu Thi Giang

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review (non Refoulement/torture Claim) / Leave Application Refused and Application Dismissed on Notification (no Oral Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time should be extended for an out-of-time application for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether there is an arguable/legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director and Board decisions on non-refoulement/torture risk
  3. 3 Whether state protection and internal relocation are available so as to defeat non-refoulement claim

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to extend time because the applicant's delay of over 45 months was excessive and unexplained and there was no reasonably arguable case of legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's or the Board's decisions (which reasonably found a private monetary dispute, availability of state protection and feasible internal relocation); therefore leave was dismissed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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