Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Procedural fairness in screening

Legal area

Court

31 Oct 2023

AKTER SAFIA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2797
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1612/2023

Leave was refused because the Director correctly applied s.37ZO, the Applicant failed to demonstrate a significant change of circumstances or a realistic prospect of success; the Director did not err in law or breach procedural fairness in declining a further screening interview or in assessing COI and evidence; given repeated, meritless attempts to re-litigate finally determined non-refoulement claims, a RPO under s.27 and the court's inherent jurisdiction was justified to prevent abuse of process, with specified conditions and a five-year duration.
23 Jan 2019

SATTAR ABDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 137
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1089/2018

Leave for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to challenge the Director's decision directly, failed to plead substantive grounds, and the application had no reasonable prospect of success in light of the Board's adverse credibility findings and lack of substantiated procedural unfairness.
12 Jun 2018

FAISAL MUHAMMAD v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1257
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1151/2017

The applicant's grounds were vague, lacked particulars and evidential support; he had sufficient opportunity to present and elaborate his case; the Director and the Adjudicator considered the claim carefully, addressed state protection and internal relocation, made no error of law and their decisions were not Wednesbury unreasonable; therefore the leave application had no realistic prospects and must be refused.
21 Nov 2012

TK v. MICHAEL C JENKINS, ESQ

Citation

TK v. MICHAEL C JENKINS, ESQ
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV286/2011

The Court held the adjudicator was entitled to find that internal relocation to the cities suggested by the Director was a reasonable alternative and that the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proof that relocation would be unsafe or unduly harsh. There was no duty to direct the Director to make further inquiries into D's territorial reach absent a request or demonstrated difficulty in obtaining relevant information, and the adjudicator's conclusion on internal relocation was not susceptible to judicial review interference after rigorous examination.
18 Apr 2011

BK v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

BK v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV60/2010

The Court held the Director's policy lawful: the Convention does not require claimants to be granted any particular immigration status or that processing must begin while claimants are lawfully present; what is required is that no person be returned until their Article 3 claim is finally determined according to high standards of fairness. The published policy is sufficiently flexible to permit prompt investigation and medical examination where necessary and does not unlawfully fetter the Director's discretion; accordingly the refusals and policy did not render the decisions unlawful in these…

Hong Kong Case Law

AKTER SAFIA v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION [Decision on Leave Application]

SATTAR ABDUL v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

FAISAL MUHAMMAD v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER [Decision on Leave Application]

TK v. MICHAEL C JENKINS, ESQ

BK v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER