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

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

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to disclose any arguable ground of judicial review with a realistic prospect of success: the Board lawfully found he lacked credibility and failed to prove ownership on which his risk rested, and alternatively his asserted case did not establish a real risk because internal relocation was viable; there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board’s Decision.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 3198
Parties
Applicant: Waheed Raza; 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
7 December 2023
Case Number
HCAL1139/2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Decision on Leave Application
Outcome
Stay under Section 15 and Regulation 7A of the Legal Aid Ordinance uplifted; Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Asylum, Torture, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Legal Aid Stay, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Asylum Torture +4 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waheed Raza

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 / Decision on Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board’s decision involved error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality
  2. 2 Whether the applicant proved ownership of the land underlying his fear and thus established risk of harm
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation within Pakistan was viable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant failed to disclose any arguable ground of judicial review with a realistic prospect of success: the Board lawfully found he lacked credibility and failed to prove ownership on which his risk rested, and alternatively his asserted case did not establish a real risk because internal relocation was viable; there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board’s Decision.

Court Disposition

Stay under Section 15 and Regulation 7A of the Legal Aid Ordinance uplifted; Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused

Orders

  • Stay under Section 15 and Regulation 7A of the Legal Aid Ordinance uplifted
  • Leave to apply for Judicial Review refused