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

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

The application for leave was refused because it was out of time with no satisfactory explanation to justify extension and, on the merits, the intended judicial review had no real prospect of success as the Board's adverse risk assessment and finding of viable internal relocation were within its fact‑finding...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 2699
Parties
Applicant: Vu Thi Hue; 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
4 November 2020
Case Number
HCAL1361/2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Decision on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review refused; application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture/cidtp, Internal Relocation, Delay/extension of Time, Standard of Judicial Review
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Non Refoulement Torture/cidtp Internal Relocation Delay/extension of Time +1 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vu Thi Hue

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board/ Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (non Refoulement) / Decision on Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's non-refoulement claim was substantiated and whether the Board erred in its risk assessment
  2. 2 Whether internal relocation was a viable protection option
  3. 3 Whether the application for leave was time‑barred and whether time should be extended

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave was refused because it was out of time with no satisfactory explanation to justify extension and, on the merits, the intended judicial review had no real prospect of success as the Board's adverse risk assessment and finding of viable internal relocation were within its fact‑finding province and did not involve error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.

Court Disposition

Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review refused; application for leave to apply for Judicial Review dismissed.

Orders

  • Extension of time for the application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused
  • Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review be dismissed