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

Sharma Sonu v Torture Claims Appeal Board /Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office [Decision On Leave Application]

Judgment Cited authorities 1 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Judgment Date04 June 2020
Neutral Citation[2020] HKCFI 1032
Year2020
Judgement NumberHCAL2320/2018
Subject MatterConstitutional and Administrative Law Proceedings
CourtCourt of First Instance (Hong Kong)
HCAL2320/2018 SHARMA SONU v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD /NON-REFOULEMENT CLAIMS PETITION OFFICE

HCAL 2320/2018

[2020] HKCFI 1032

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 2320 of 2018

BETWEEN

Sharma Sonu Applicant
and
Torture Claims Appeal Board /
Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office		 Putative Respondent

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following:

consideration of the documents only; or
consideration of the documents and oral submissions by the Applicant in open court;

Order by Deputy High Court Judge Bruno Chan:

Leave to apply for judicial review dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1. The Applicant is a 29-year-old national of Nepal who arrived in Hong Kong on 25 January 2015, and when he was refused entry by the Immigration Department he raised a non‑refoulement claim on the basis that if he returned to Nepal he would be harmed or killed by the Communist Party of Nepal (“Maoist”) for refusing to join their party.

2. By a Notice of Decision dated 2 April 2015 the Director of Immigration (“The Director”) rejected the Applicant’s claim on all then applicable grounds including risk of torture under Part VIIC of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap 115 (“torture risk”), risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 3 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights (“HKBOR”) (“BOR 3 risk”), and risk of persecution with reference to the non-refoulement principle under Article 33 of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (“persecution risk”).

3. On 16 April 2015 the Applicant lodged an appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“Board”) against the Director’s decision, and his appeal was dismissed by the Board on 21 July 2015.

4. On 27 July 2015 the Applicant sought leave to apply for judicial review of the decisions of both the Director and the Board under HCAL 139/2015, but his leave application was refused by Hon Fung J on 12 February 2016.

5. By a letter dated 18 January 2017 the Director on his own initiative invited the Applicant to submit within 14 days any additional facts which may be relevant to his non‑refoulement claim on all applicable grounds in particularly any...

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