Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Hong Kong | 1-800-335-6202

Re Morillo Eleja Loquinario

Judgment Cited authorities 1 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date30 March 2021
Neutral Citation[2021] HKCA 398
Year2021
Judgement NumberCACV257/2020
Subject MatterCivil Appeal
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
CACV257A/2020 RE MORILLO ELEJA LOQUINARIO

CACV 257/2020

[2021] HKCA 398

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 257 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1773 OF 2018)

_______________________________

RE: MORILLO ELEJA LOQUINARIO Applicant

_______________________________

Before: Hon Yeung VP, Chu JA and Toh J in Court
Date of Written Submissions: 20 January 2021
Date of Judgment: 30 March 2021

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Hon Toh J (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1. By a judgment dated 29 December 2020[1], this Court (Yeung VP and Toh J) dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung (“the Judge”) given on 7 July 2020 in HCAL 1773/2018 refusing to grant leave to her to apply for judicial review. The applicant sought to review the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Adjudicator of the Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (“the Board”) given on 15 August 2018 dismissing her petition/appeal from the decision of the Director of Immigration (“Director”) given on 15 March 2018 rejecting her non-refoulement claim.

2. By a Notice of Motion dated 8 January 2021, the applicant now seeks leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on the following grounds:

“1. In my Judgement, the Appellate Judges did not proper consider of my fear in my claim, the authority Torture Claims Appeal Board (the TCAB) and the Director failed to proper observation in to my claim, that I would face still risk upon refoulement to my country of origin.

2. Failure to consider the Country of origin conditions (COL) information that I would face genuine risk upon refoulement to my Country of origin.

3. Failure to consider my claim under BOR 3 risk.”

3. In compliance with the directions made by the Registrar of Civil Appeals on 13 January 2021, the applicant lodged her written submissions on 20 January 2021.

4. In the written submissions, she advanced the following:

(1) The Board and the Director failed to make sufficient inquiries into the Country of origin information (“COI”) in respect of her case and adopted a passive approach in contravention of the high standard of fairness viz the discharging of the burden of proof as per Li CJ in Secretary for Security v Sakthevel Prabakar[2] and TK v. Michael C Jenkins and another[3].

(2) The Board and the Director failed to take into account and /or give proper weight to relevant considerations and materials which they should have, and hence their decisions are illegal. Specially, this Court has failed to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT