Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Persecution (refugee law)

  • 16 Oct 2019

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

    Citation
    [2019] HKCFI 1051
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL145/2018

    Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any reasonably arguable legal error, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Director's and Board's decisions; the Board's adverse credibility findings and conclusion that the risk was localized and internal relocation was available were open on the evidence and not susceptible to successful judicial review.

    • Non-refoulement
    • Torture risk
    • Article 2 hkbor (right to life)
    • Article 3 hkbor (torture and inhuman treatment)
    • Persecution (refugee law)
    • Credibility assessment

  • 17 Jun 2019

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

    Citation
    [2019] HKCFI 782
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL1667/2018

    Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the adjudicator's decision disclosed no error of law, no procedural unfairness and was not Wednesbury unreasonable; the applicant's grounds were unparticularised, contained duplications and irrelevant material, and the claim was not reasonably arguable with no realistic prospect of success.

    • Non‑refoulement
    • Torture and cidtp
    • Persecution (refugee law)
    • Leave to apply for judicial review
    • Credibility assessment
    • Wednesbury unreasonableness

  • 18 Dec 2018

    ON v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 2727
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL663/2017

    The Adjudicator's decision was quashed because he acted unlawfully and unfairly by disbelieving the Applicant's claimed sexual orientation without adequate enquiry or opportunity to corroborate, failing to obtain and consider readily available COI (including criminalisation of homosexuality and risks posed by Boko Haram), and applying an incorrect test for persecution that unduly required past severe physical harm; the matter is remitted to the TCAB for rehearing by a different adjudicator.

    • Non‑refoulement
    • Torture convention
    • Persecution (refugee law)
    • Procedural fairness
    • Country of origin information
    • Sexual orientation asylum claims

  • 14 Jun 2018

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

    Citation
    [2018] HKCFI 1266
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCAL399/2017

    The adjudicator's factual findings were credible and lawfully applied to the relevant statutory and human rights tests; there was no error of law, no procedural unfairness and the decision was not Wednesbury unreasonable; therefore the applicant's claim was not reasonably arguable and there was no realistic prospect of success, so leave to apply for judicial review is refused.

    • Non-refoulement
    • Torture/cidtp
    • Persecution (refugee law)
    • Wednesbury unreasonableness
    • Leave to apply for judicial review
    • Procedural fairness