29 Apr 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any specific errors in the Leave Decision; his assertions were general, unparticularised and lacked substance; absent demonstrated error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality the Court will not interfere with the Board's and Director's decisions.
26 Feb 2026
Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to show any arguable legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Appeal Board's decision; the Board correctly applied the law and had sufficient evidence to support its credibility, factual and alternative relocation findings.
13 Feb 2026
Leave to apply for judicial review is refused because the Board made no error of law, committed no procedural unfairness and its Decision was not irrational: the Applicant failed to discharge his burden and refused to cooperate so there was no factual basis for protection; alternatively the Board correctly found internal relocation/modification of conduct would avoid risk.
23 Jan 2026
The Board’s decision was lawfully reached after adequate procedure and evidence assessment; the applicant failed to prove a well‑founded fear of persecution or inability/unwillingness of the state to protect the child; no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality was demonstrated; accordingly leave to apply for judicial review is refused.
19 Nov 2025
Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to advance a reasonably arguable claim with realistic prospects and the Board's decision demonstrated no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality such as would justify judicial intervention.
10 Oct 2024
Extension of time refused and application dismissed because the applicant filed more than six months late without explanation and has no realistic prospect of success: the Board's findings that the risk of harm was remote, state protection was available, internal relocation was viable and the dispute was a personal grudge not within the Convention were reasonable and showed no error of law or procedural unfairness.
19 Jan 2024
Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's adverse credibility findings and therefore lacked a realistic prospect of success; the court will not re-evaluate facts within the Board's province.
7 Nov 2023
Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the applicant failed to identify any arguable legal or procedural error; the Board's findings that the risk was speculative, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were lawful and not Wednesbury unreasonable, so there was no realistic prospect of success.
29 Sept 2023
Leave was refused because the applicants only challenged factual findings of the Board which were made on credibility and COI; the court found no error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board’s decisions, that state protection and internal relocation were reasonably available, and that the proposed judicial reviews had no realistic prospect of success.
30 May 2023
The Board made adverse credibility findings and concluded past ill-treatment was low intensity, state protection was available and internal relocation was viable; there was no procedural unfairness or legal error; therefore the applicant had no realistic prospect of success and leave to apply for judicial review was refused.