15 May 2026
The applicant failed to identify or substantiate any legal error, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the judge's refusal to grant leave; accordingly the appeal is without merit and is dismissed, with the Court declining to re-evaluate the Board's factual assessments.
15 May 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify or substantiate any error in the judge's refusal of leave and raised no viable ground of appeal; the Court will not intervene absent errors of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision.
12 May 2026
The applicant failed to demonstrate any public law error in the Board's factual findings or in the Judge's refusal to grant leave; the Board's conclusions on severity of past ill-treatment, absence of public official involvement, availability of state protection and viability of internal relocation were open on the evidence, so the Court dismissed the appeal.
12 May 2026
The appeal fails because the applicant did not advance any reasonably arguable public law error in the Board's decision or in the Judge's refusal of leave; the Board's factual findings were open to it and no legal or procedural error was demonstrated, therefore the judge's refusal was correct.
7 May 2026
The appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to identify or substantiate any viable ground to reverse the judge's refusal of leave; bare allegations without particulars do not meet the threshold for granting leave and the Court will not rehear the Board's factual assessments.
6 May 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Deputy High Court Judge's refusal to grant leave; the Court will not interfere with the Board's factual assessments absent such errors and therefore upholds the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review.
5 May 2026
Leave to apply for judicial review was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any grounds of review or any arguable error of law, irrationality or procedural unfairness in the Board's detailed decision; the Board's findings that there was no real risk of serious harm, that state protection was available and that internal relocation was viable were reasonable and unassailable on judicial review.
30 Apr 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to advance any viable grounds or identify any error in the judge's refusal of leave; bare, unparticularised allegations are insufficient and the Court will not overturn the judge or re-examine the Board's decision absent error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality.
30 Apr 2026
Leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed because the applicant failed to identify any arguable public law ground; the Board applied the law correctly and observed high standards of fairness; its findings of fact (non-credibility, lack of serious intent, availability of state protection and internal relocation) did not disclose error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality, so the intended challenge had no realistic prospect of success.
30 Apr 2026
The appeal is dismissed because the applicant failed to put forward any viable, specific or substantiated grounds showing error of law, procedural unfairness or irrationality in the Board's decision; therefore refusal of leave was correct and should stand.