Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Asylum screening

Legal area

Court

14 Jan 2025

VU THI HIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 168
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL986/2021

Leave to apply for judicial review was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and the Board's decisions; credibility findings, assessment of low risk, availability of state protection and internal relocation were rational and supported by evidence, and the applicant subsequently confirmed it was safe to return.
18 May 2021

AHMED JAMIL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 1409
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1500/2018

Extension of time refused and leave dismissed because the applicant was almost three months out of time without explanation, his intended challenge disclosed no arguable legal error or procedural unfairness in the Director's or Board's decisions, and findings as to low risk, available state protection and reasonable internal relocation were entitled to deference under anxious scrutiny and thus no prospect of success existed.
12 Oct 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1915
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1159/2017

There was no arguable basis to challenge the Director's or the Adjudicator's decisions: both applied the correct law, considered the evidence, afforded procedural fairness and gave intelligible reasons; the Applicant produced no corroborating evidence to undermine credibility findings and no realistic prospect of success existed on judicial review, so leave was refused.
12 Jun 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1254
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1092/2017

The applicant's grounds were not reasonably arguable because the Adjudicator and Director conducted adequate review, invited and considered relevant material, the appeal bundle was served in time, the applicant had adequate opportunity and assistance, and the decisions were not Wednesbury unreasonable; consequently leave to apply for judicial review is refused.

Hong Kong Case Law

VU THI HIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

AHMED JAMIL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD [Decision on Leave Application]

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

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