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

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

Extension of time to apply for leave was refused because the applicant delayed about three months without satisfactory explanation; the Board's refusal to allow late filing was lawful given the applicant failed to submit the required completed torture claim form so the Board could not consider merits; no error of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] HKCFI 146
Parties
Applicant: Zahidul Islam; 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
26 January 2023
Case Number
HCAL1889/2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review / Notification of Judge's Decision Following Paper Consideration (order 53 R.3)
Outcome
Extension of time refused; application for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Non Refoulement, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Extension of Time/delay, Torture Claim Procedures, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Immigration Law Constitutional Law Non Refoulement Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Extension of Time/delay Torture Claim Procedures Procedural Fairness

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zahidul Islam

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 / Notification of Judge's Decision Following Paper Consideration (order 53 R.3)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend time for applying for leave to apply for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in refusing to allow late filing of notice of appeal/petition
  3. 3 Whether the Board was required to consider merits despite absence of a completed torture claim form

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time to apply for leave was refused because the applicant delayed about three months without satisfactory explanation; the Board's refusal to allow late filing was lawful given the applicant failed to submit the required completed torture claim form so the Board could not consider merits; no error of law or procedural unfairness was demonstrated and there was no realistic prospect of success, therefore the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused; application for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • The extension of time for the application for Judicial Review be refused.
  • The application for Judicial Review be dismissed.