Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Torture convention (cat)

Legal area

Court

1 Feb 2021

BUI THI LIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 256
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1216/2018

Leave refused because applicant did not establish any reasonably arguable public law ground; the Board's factual findings that risk was low and that state protection and internal relocation were available were neither irrational nor procedurally unfair, and the applicant's account did not meet the required severity threshold for protection.
8 Jan 2019

H K KOHINOOR v. WESLEY WONG, ESQ. [Decision on Leave Application]

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 25
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL499/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant's complaints were not reasonably arguable: the Adjudicator's decision was supported by adequate reasoning, not Wednesbury unreasonable, and there was no demonstrated procedural unfairness or legal error; the Director had considered BOR2 and the Applicant failed to show prejudice from lack of legal representation or late bundle service.
24 Dec 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2770
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL343/2018

Leave was refused because the Adjudicator's adverse credibility finding was well-reasoned and supported by the evidence, there was no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision, the Applicant's complaints were not reasonably arguable and thus he had no realistic prospect of success on judicial review; leave against the Director's decisions was not available where appeal to the Board had been pursued.
23 Aug 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1892
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1093/2017

The Applicant failed to provide a satisfactory or documented explanation for a seven-week late filing; the Board's refusal of the late appeal was not Wednesbury unreasonable; the Director's findings on risk, state protection and internal relocation were rational and procedurally fair on rigorous scrutiny; the Applicant had no realistic prospect of success and leave was refused.
30 Jul 2018

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

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1676
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1161/2017

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant's complaints were not reasonably arguable and he had no realistic prospect of success: the Director and Adjudicator conducted a lawful, reasonable and fair screening process, made intelligible and adequate reasons when read together, found the applicant not credible, and their conclusions were not Wednesbury unreasonable.

Hong Kong Case Law

BUI THI LIEN v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD/ NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE [Decision on Leave Application]

H K KOHINOOR v. WESLEY WONG, ESQ. [Decision on Leave Application]

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

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

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