WANGSIH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

WANGSIH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD / NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify arguable public law errors in the Board's decision; the Board's principal factual findings — no reliable evidence of conversion, availability of state protection, viability of internal relocation, and absence of a substantial risk of ill-treatment — were open to the Board on the evidence and did not disclose a basis for supervisory relief.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 1917
Parties
Applicant: Wangsih; 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
17 June 2025
Case Number
HCAL5/2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture Risk, Subsequent Claim, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Religious Conversion, Sexual Orientation Persecution
Source Language
EN
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Risk Subsequent Claim State Protection +3 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wangsih

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to apply for judicial review should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Board misdirected itself in fact-finding regarding conversion from Islam to Christianity
  3. 3 Whether the applicant faces a real and substantial risk of torture or ill-treatment on return to Indonesia

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify arguable public law errors in the Board's decision; the Board's principal factual findings — no reliable evidence of conversion, availability of state protection, viability of internal relocation, and absence of a substantial risk of ill-treatment — were open to the Board on the evidence and did not disclose a basis for supervisory relief.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.