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

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

Leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the Board correctly applied the law, conducted a fair and reasoned credibility assessment within its fact-finding remit, and the applicant did not identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality such that the decision had a realistic prospect of being quashed.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 2268
Parties
Applicant: Yanti; 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
3 June 2025
Case Number
HCAL679/2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (leave to Apply) / Leave Application Refused
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Unified Screening Mechanism, Credibility Findings, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Non Refoulement Unified Screening Mechanism Credibility Findings Wednesbury Unreasonableness +1 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yanti

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) / Leave Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Board's decision involved an error of law
  2. 2 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the Board's process
  3. 3 Whether the Board's decision was irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the Board correctly applied the law, conducted a fair and reasoned credibility assessment within its fact-finding remit, and the applicant did not identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality such that the decision had a realistic prospect of being quashed.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for judicial review refused.