Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Enhanced wednesbury unreasonableness

Legal area

Court

17 May 2018

RE MD HIMEL also known as MUNA SARKAR also known as SAHEN

Citation

[2018] HKCA 279
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACV1/2018

Leave to apply for judicial review was properly refused because there was no realistic prospect of success: the Director and the Board reasonably considered and applied COI, conducted sufficient inquiry and fairness, correctly found no state acquiescence or inadequate state protection, properly assessed credibility (including that medical reports were not probative), and their decisions were not Wednesbury unreasonable.
29 May 2017

S v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER

Citation

S v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL160/2016

Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant failed to demonstrate reasonably arguable grounds with a realistic prospect of success: the Adjudicator did not err in law or breach procedural fairness, properly considered COI and state protection, correctly applied the standard of proof, and reasonably concluded the assaults were private non-state conduct not amounting to torture or CIDTP; the Applicant's unexplained 22‑month delay to challenge the Director's decision warranted refusal of extension of time.