← All Authorities
United States public authority liabilitypublic authority duties

Egbert v Boule

596 US 482 (2022)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2022
StatusBinding authority

Summary

SCOTUS further restricted Bivens actions, holding courts may not recognise a damages remedy against federal officials if any reason exists to think Congress is better placed to create one.

Key Principle

The Court further restricted Bivens actions, holding that if there is any reason to think Congress might be better equipped to create a damages remedy, a court may not recognise a Bivens cause of action.

Area of Law

human-rights

Related Cases

GA v Director of Immigration (Torture Claim) [2014] HKCFA 64

The statutory non-refoulement screening mechanism must afford high standards of procedural fairness, including legal representation, interpretation, and adequate opportunity to present the claim.

Ubamaka v Secretary for Security (Non-Refoulement) [2012] HKCFA 87

Article 3 HKBOR provides absolute protection against torture and cruel treatment, barring removal of any person facing a real risk of such treatment from HK.

Secretary for Security v Sakthevel Prabakar (Asylum Procedure) [2004] HKCFA 33

High standards of procedural fairness and anxious scrutiny apply to torture claim assessments, requiring the decision-maker to provide adequate reasons.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Egbert v Boule and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Egbert v Boule