Read the full judgment text of CACV 8/2018 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 24 April 2018 before Lam VP, Chu JA, Barma JA.
Administrative law – judicial review – non-refoulement claim – Pakistani applicant overstayed and lodged claim based on fear of harm from family members over land dispute – Director of Immigration rejected BOR 2, BOR 3, persecution and torture risks – Torture Claims Appeal Board dismissed appeal finding applicant not a credible witness – application for leave to apply for judicial review refused – whether new grounds not raised below can be raised on appeal from refusal of leave – whether lack of publicly-funded legal representation at appeal stage violates high standard of fairness – whether adverse credibility finding is reviewable on judicial review – held: new grounds cannot be raised on appeal from refusal of leave as that would allow applicants to circumvent Order 53 Rule 4(1) – held: neither Sakthevel Prabakar nor FB v Director of Immigration prescribes an absolute right to free legal representation at all stages – held: evaluation of evidence is for the Director and Board as primary decision-makers and is not reviewable absent error of law or procedural unfairness – enhanced Wednesbury test applied and satisfied – appeal dismissed.
Legal issues: Whether new grounds not raised in the original leave application can be raised on appeal from refusal of leave · Whether lack of publicly-funded legal representation at all stages violates the high standard of fairness · Whether the adjudicator's adverse credibility finding is reviewable on judicial review
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; refusal of leave to apply for judicial review upheld.
Cited by 300 cases · Cites 8 cases