← All Authorities
Hong Kong Leading Case article 39 iccpr incorporationbill of rights ordinanceconvention rightspublic authority duties

Ubamaka v Secretary for Security

(2012) 15 HKCFAR 272
JurisdictionHong Kong
CourtHK Court of Final Appeal
Year2012
StatusBinding authority

Summary

The absolute prohibition against torture under Art 3 of the HK Bill of Rights applies in immigration decisions, imposing non-refoulement obligations on HK authorities.

Key Principle

non-refoulement obligations; absolute prohibition against torture under Article 3 BOR applies in HK immigration decisions

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Ubamaka v Secretary for Security and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Ubamaka v Secretary for Securi...