Read the full judgment text of CACV 212/2018 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 21 August 2018 before Lam VP, Yuen JA, Chu JA.
Administrative law – judicial review – non-refoulement protection claim – appeal against refusal of leave to apply for judicial review – Torture Claims Appeal Board – Bangladesh national – applicant with history of using false identities and prior deportations for unapproved employment – illegal entry to Hong Kong in 2013 – claim rejected by Director and Board as fabricated – role of Court in judicial review – enhanced standard of 'rigorous examination and anxious scrutiny' in non-refoulement cases – whether judge erred in refusing leave – whether Board's and Director's decisions were Wednesbury unreasonable or procedurally unfair – whether applicant could rely on materials not before Board – fresh evidence and new arguments on appeal – Ladd v Marshall test – appeal dismissed – applicant acting in person – Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap. 383) articles 2 and 3 – Immigration Ordinance (Cap 115) Part VIIC – Court of Appeal affirming deputy judge's refusal of leave.
Legal issues: Whether the judge erred in refusing leave to apply for judicial review of the Torture Claims Appeal Board's decision · Whether the Board and Director's decisions were Wednesbury unreasonable or procedurally unfair
Outcome: Appeal dismissed.
Cited by 179 cases · Cites 16 cases