Read the full judgment text of CACV 218/2017 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 12 January 2018 before Cheung CJHC, Lam VP.
Administrative law – judicial review – non-refoulement claim – leave to apply for judicial review – high standard of fairness – legal representation – language assistance – Wednesbury unreasonableness – Applicant entered Hong Kong illegally on 10 January 2016 and lodged a non-refoulement claim on 13 January 2016 based on alleged threats from supporters of Pakistan Muslim League due to his opposition party support – Director of Immigration rejected claims on 30 June 2016 (BOR 3, persecution, torture risks) and 31 March 2017 (BOR 2 risk) – Torture Claims Appeal Board dismissed appeal on 12 June 2017 – Whether high standard of fairness under Sakthevel Prabakar requires automatic provision of free legal representation at all stages of non-refoulement proceedings – Held: No – high standard of fairness does not prescribe absolute right to free legal representation at every stage – Applicant had legal representation before Director and advanced case fully before Board – Whether lack of translation or language assistance rendered proceedings procedurally unfair – Held: No – NCF completed with interpreter assistance; no complaint of mistranslation raised; no request for assistance made regarding Immigration Department letter – Whether judge erred in refusing leave to apply for judicial review – Held: No – no error of law or procedure identified; decisions of Director and Board satisfied enhanced Wednesbury test – Appeal dismissed with no prospect of success.
Legal issues: Whether high standard of fairness requires automatic free legal representation at all stages · Whether lack of translation or language assistance rendered proceedings unfair · Whether the judge erred in refusing leave to apply for judicial review
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; refusal of leave to apply for judicial review upheld
Cited by 761 cases · Cites 2 cases