YASER SHAIKH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

YASER SHAIKH v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable grounds and the Board's decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board's factual findings on lack of torture, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were reasonable and justified refusal of relief.

Citation
[2025] HKCFI 2703
Parties
Applicant: Yaser Shaikh; Putative Respondent: Torture Claims Appeal Board; Putative Interested Party: Director of Immigration
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 July 2025
Case Number
HCAL340/2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage Considered on Documents and Oral Hearing; Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Torture, Judicial Review, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Unified Screening Mechanism, State Protection, Internal Relocation
Source Language
EN
Constitutional and Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Non Refoulement Torture Judicial Review Wednesbury Unreasonableness Unified Screening Mechanism +2 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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yaser Shaikh

Applicant

Torture Claims Appeal Board

Putative Respondent

Director of Immigration

Putative Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Leave Stage Considered on Documents and Oral Hearing; Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant identified any legally arguable grounds for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Torture Claims Appeal Board committed errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in rejecting the non-refoulement claim
  3. 3 Whether the Board's factual findings on risk, state protection and internal relocation were Wednesbury unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable grounds and the Board's decision contained no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality; the Board's factual findings on lack of torture, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were reasonable and justified refusal of relief.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • Amend name of putative respondent to Torture Claims Appeal Board
  • Amend name of putative interested party to Director of Immigration