Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)
Following;
consideration of documents only; or
consideration of documents
and
Applicant being absent in open court;
Order by
Deputy High Court Judge K.W. Lung
:
Leave to apply for Judicial Review be refused
.
Observations for the Applicant:
THE APPLICATION
1.
By Notice of Decision dated 7 May 2018 (“the Director’s Decision”), the Director of Immigration refused to re-open the applicant’s non-refoulement claim. The applicant appealed to the Torture Claims Appeal Board/Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office (“the Board”). The Board, by Decision dated 3 October 2018 (“the Board’s Decision”), dismissed his appeal.
2.
The applicant applies for leave to apply for judicial review of the Board’s Decision.
3.
The applicant did not ask for a hearing. Pursuant to Order 53, rule 3(3) of the Rules of the High Court, I shall deal with his application on paper.
The applicant
4.
The applicant is a national of Pakistan. He was arrested by police on 6 May 2009 and he raised a torture claim by way of written signification dated 9 May 2009. However, he failed to attend an interview with the immigration officer. The matter was kept in abeyance for 4 years.
5.
In 2017, he applied to resume his application. The Director acceded to his request and advised him to complete the Non-refoulement Claim Form (“NCF”) and returned it within 28 days from 29 March 2017. He failed to submit the NCF within time. Under section 37ZG of the Ordinance, the applicant’s torture claim was treated as withdrawn. The Director so notified the applicant.
6.
The applicant then applied to the Director for re-opening his claim. Having considered his explanations, the Director refused his request. He appealed to the Board.
The Board’s consideration and Decision
7.
In the Board’s Decision, the Board set out the proceedings before the Director, who had advised the applicant to return the NCF to the Removal Assessment Section (“RAS”) of the Department within 28 days from 29 March 2017.
8.
On the same day, the applicant was provided with legal assistance under the Duty Lawyer Service (“DLS”).
9.
The Director had issued 2 letters respectively dated 19 April 2017 and 10 May 2017 advising the applicant to return the completed NCF on or before 17 May 2017 and the consequences if he failed to do so.
10.
On 17 May 2017, DLS informed the Director that they did not have instructions to act for the applicant.
11.
The Director sent a written notification to the applicant, informing him that his non-refoulement
Back
