10 Apr 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable or specific grounds to challenge the Leave Decision and failed to comply with directions to file skeleton arguments; under settled authority the Court will not re‑examine the Board's decision afresh in the absence of adequate grounds.
10 Apr 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable, particularised grounds identifying error in the Judge's refusal of leave; general assertions about fear if refouled are insufficient and the Court will not revisit the decision‑maker's merits when no proper grounds to reverse the Leave Decision are put forward (applying Nupur Mst).
9 Apr 2026
The trial judge rightly accepted the victims' consistent identification evidence and related documentary evidence and permissibly inferred the applicant's participation in a joint fraudulent scheme; there is no demonstrable error warranting appellate intervention, so leave to appeal is refused.
9 Apr 2026
The court upheld the Inquiry Committee's findings because they were open on the evidence and involved professional judgments for which the tribunal was best placed; the appellant, as founder and registered architect who signed contracts and certifications, had a duty to supervise and his repeated supervisory failures and incorrect certifications amounted to misconduct/neglect under the ARO; the imposed suspended removal penalty was within the tribunal's discretionary range and not excessive, so the appeal was dismissed.
2 Apr 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant advanced no viable grounds to overturn the Deputy High Court Judge's dismissal of the leave application; the appellate role is confined to examination of the judge's decision on the grounds advanced and factual assessments by the Board and Director are not subject to rehearing absent legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality.
23 Mar 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify with particulars any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Judge's Leave Decision; general, unsupported assertions about risk and country information are insufficient and the Court will not usurp the Board's fact-finding role.
17 Mar 2026
Appeal dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Deputy High Court Judge's refusal of leave; absent viable, particularised grounds the Court will not interfere with the Judge's decision or re-examine the Board's merits.
5 Mar 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any error in the Leave Decision with adequate particulars and there was no viable ground to reverse the judge; the Court will not re-examine the merits of the non-refoulement decision on appeal from refusal of leave.
27 Feb 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any error of law or relevant omission in the judge's refusal of leave and had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review; the judge's decision was not shown to be legally erroneous or plainly wrong under the applicable appellate standard.
23 Feb 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the leave application was dismissed at the applicant's request and the appellant failed to particularise any arguable error of the Judge or advance viable grounds of appeal; the Court will not retry the merits of the decision-maker's determination.