FOM v Minister for Justice & anor; KE v International Protection Appeals Tribunal & ors

EMNireland

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice, Ireland, the Attorney General and the International Protection Appeals Tribunal
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2025] IECA 43
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:25 Feb 2025
Judge:Meenan, C.
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum, Asylum Applicant, Common European Asylum System (CEAS), Dublin Regulation, Protection (International), Return, Third Country (Safe)
Country of Origin:Iraq, Nigeria
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/ee80aa48-9894-421e-a771-4a2c60e262b9/2025_IECA_43%20%20.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The appeals were brought by the appellants (the Minister) against orders of certiorari made in the High Court. In the High Court, it was found that the way in which the United Kingdom was designated as a safe third country following its departure from the European Union was contrary to EU law. The High Court found that Irish legislation … Read More

Principles:The amendments to the International Protection Act 2015 brought in by the Civil Law, Criminal Law and Superannuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2024 provide new and additional safeguards for persons who are determined to have previously been in a safe third country.
Go Back

Wen Wei & Ting Ting v Minister for Justice & anor

EMNireland

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice and the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána
Court/s:Court of Appeal, Supreme Court
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:19 Dec 2024
Judge:Woulfe, S., Hogan, G., O’Donnell
Category:Immigration law
Keywords:Border control, Entry (Refusal of), Non-EU National, Refusal of leave to land, Student, Visa
Country of Origin:Malaysia
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/d56fd777-f75b-4b75-a57c-14e76b9e95c0/[2024]_IESC__58_Woulfe%20J.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The appellants were two Malaysian nationals who sought permission to land and enter the State at Cork Airport in December 2020 in order to start an English language course in January 2021. They were refused permission to land because the course was to be conducted online and not in person. This decision was made at the time of the … Read More

Principles:The reference to public policy in the refusal of leave to land ground under section 4(3)(j), Immigration Act 2004 should be understood as distinct from national security and as granting wide discretion to the Minister.
Go Back

L.A. (a minor suing by his mother and next friend, A.A.) & ors v International Protection Appeals Tribunal & ors

EMNireland

Respondent/Defendant:The International Protection Appeals Tribunal, the Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland, and the Attorney General
Court/s:Court of Appeal, High Court
Citation/s:[2024] IECA 133
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:29 May 2024
Judge:Power, A., Ní Raifeartaigh, Ú, Allen, S.
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum Applicant, Child, Employment, Reception Conditions
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/7fe7c809-1b10-427b-8734-a8c38d9f1e96/2024_IECA_133.pdf/pdf#view=fitH
References:NHV v Minister for Justice and Equality [2017]

Facts: The first applicant was a child, and the second and third applicants were his parents. His parents applied for international protection in Ireland before he was born. While their applications were being processed, they applied and obtained labour market access permissions. Their applications for international protection were refused before the child was born and their right of access to … Read More

Principles:Parents cannot derive a right by proxy to access the labour market from their child who is an applicant for international protection where they themselves are not applicants.
Go Back

TF v Minister for Justice

EMNireland


TF v Minister for Justice
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2023] IECA 183
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:20 Jul 2023
Judge:Ni Raifeartaigh U, Allen S, Butler N
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Country of Origin Information, Refugee Status (Withdrawal of)
Country of Origin:Romania
URL:https://courts.ie/acc/alfresco/5e6dced8-d446-478c-815b-f7d9bc245133/2023_IECA_183.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The appellant was a Romanian national of Roma ethnicity who arrived in Ireland in 2001 and was granted refugee status in 2004 on the basis that he had suffered persecution at the hands of the Romanian police on account of his ethnicity. He became a naturalised Irish citizen in 2015. In 2010, a European Arrest Warrant was issued by … Read More

Principles:In order to make a valid decision to revoke a person’s refugee status there must be an individualised assessment not just of the general circumstances in the country of origin but also of the factors relied upon by the individual at the time they were granted asylum.
Go Back

Ahmed v DPP

EMNireland


Ahmed v DPP
Respondent/Defendant:The People (At the suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2023] IECA 107
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:17 Apr 2023
Judge:Edwards J., McCarthy P., Kennedy I.
Category:Immigration, Trafficking
Keywords:Entry (Illegal), Trafficking in Human Beings
Country of Origin:Spain
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/961a61ad-6b8a-450f-85fd-c622d42016a2/2023_IECA_107.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: In February 2021, the appellant arrived at Dublin Airport on a flight from Lisbon. He was stopped by a customs officer when leaving the airport as the officer thought it was unusual that the appellant did not have much luggage with him, and only essential travel was permitted at that time of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. Upon searching the … Read More

Principles:The facilitation of illegal entry to Ireland is a serious criminal offence and although coercion may not be involved, it still falls under section 2 of the Illegal Immigrations (Trafficking) Act 2000.
Go Back

DPP v. Edosa & anor

EMNireland


DPP v. Edosa & anor
Respondent/Defendant:Alicia Edosa and Edith Enoghasghase
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2023] IECA 38
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:20 Feb 2023
Judge: Birmingham P. Edwards J. McCarthy P.
Category:Trafficking
Keywords:Trafficking in Human Beings
Country of Origin:Nigeria
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/1621968b-8253-4592-b05a-3d44837298fd/2023_IECA_38%20(unapproved).pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: This was an appeal from Mullingar Circuit Court. The respondents were convicted of trafficking four victims in Ireland, organising prostitution and money laundering. Ms. Edosa received an effective sentence of five years and eight months imprisonment, while Ms. Enoghaghase received one of five years and one month. The victims had been targeted in Nigeria, forced to undergo Voodoo rituals … Read More

Principles: Human trafficking involves harm that is multi-dimensional and is a serious crime, and as such it requires a high headline sentence. Headline sentences for human trafficking offences should not be less than ten years.
Go Back

H.A. v Minister for Justice

EMNireland


H.A. v Minister for Justice
Respondent/Defendant:H.A.
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2022] IECA 166
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial Review
Judgment Date/s:22 Jul 2022
Judge: Donnelly A
Category:Asylum, Family Reunification, Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum, Child, Family Reunification, Family Unity (Right to), Minor
Country of Origin:Somalia
URL:https://courts.ie/acc/alfresco/bc913491-38f9-446a-ba0f-6324d8b0c8ad/2022_IECA_166.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

 Facts: The respondent was a national of Somalia who was granted refugee status in Ireland. She applied for family reunification with her niece and nephew under section 56 of the International Protection Act 2015. Her niece and nephew are orphans and she had accepted responsibility for them. A ‘Declaration of Responsibility’ from Somalia was submitted in this regard.  The application … Read More

Principles:In a decision on a family reunification application, the Minister must consider evidence submitted as regards the relationship of a parent to the child, in this case, a Declaration of Responsibility. This should be referenced in the decision issued by the decision maker.
Go Back

Akram v Minister for Justice and Equality and the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána

admin

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2022] IECA 108
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial Review/Appeal
Judgment Date/s:12 May 2022
Judge:Donnelly, A., Ní Raifeartaigh, U., Power, A.
Category:Immigration, Immigration law
Keywords:Border control, Detention, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Country of Origin:Pakistan
URL:https://courts.ie/acc/alfresco/62535f02-327f-472c-bf28-9244c0ea6b0a/2022_IECA_108_Donnelly%20J..pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The applicant, a national of Pakistan and a student in Cyprus, was refused leave to land at Dublin Airport on 21 October 2017. While he held a visa for the State, he was refused leave to land pursuant to section 4(3)(k), Immigration Act 2004, on the grounds that there was reason to believe that he intended to enter the … Read More

Principles:When refusing leave to land, a mobile phone is among the documents that can be searched under section 7(3) of the Immigration Act 2004, however, the copying and retention of documents obtained from a mobile phone is not permitted under this section.
Go Back

Mukovska v Minister for Justice and Minister for Foreign Affairs

admin


Mukovska v Minister for Justice and Minister for Foreign Affairs
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice, Ireland and Minister for Foreign Affairs
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2021] IECA 340
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:21 Dec 2021
Judge:Hunt T.
Category:Visa
Keywords:Overstay(er), Student, Visa
Country of Origin:Ukraine
URL:https://www.courts.ie/view/judgments/a9a730a3-241c-48e9-adc7-f17c36a9ff06/e49c3743-7700-4e03-ab81-ce2e2e582c46/2021_IECA_340%20(Unapproved).pdf/pdf

Facts: The appellant, a Ukrainian national, applied for a student visa for Ireland to attend an English language course. The visa application was refused on the grounds of, inter alia, insufficient finances and that the need to undertake the course was not demonstrated or warranted. The appellant’s appeal was also refused. The Appeal Officer’s refusal cited an additional reason for … Read More

Principles:Reasons, even if terse, short-form, broad and/or general, must nonetheless disclose the essential rationale of a decision, whether it is discretionary, or concerned with a benefit or privilege rather than a right or obligation. The level of detail that must be set out in reasons is dependent on and influenced by the nature of the decision in each case.
Go Back

T.P. v Minister for Justice and Equality

admin


T.P. v Minister for Justice and Equality
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice and Equality
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2021] IECA 50
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial review/appeal
Judgment Date/s:22 Feb 2021
Judge:Faherty J.
Category:International protection, Residence
Keywords:Deportation, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Family Life (Right to), Family Member, Family Unity (Right to), Final Decision, Leave to Remain
Country of Origin:Nigeria
URL:www.courts.ie/view/judgments/c7b41c59-f483-4f5b-a629-77963774b876/0a282be6-4bdd-4b8a-a990-e0dac15eae1a/2021_IECA_50%20(Unapproved).pdf/pdf

Facts: The appellant, a Nigerian national, arrived in Ireland in February 2013. He applied for international protection, but this application was unsuccessful. In October 2016, the appellant applied for leave to remain pursuant to section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended. He had been in a relationship with his partner, a Zimbabwean national, since 2013. His partner’s application … Read More

Principles:The threshold for substantial grounds for judicial review of a refusal of an application for leave to remain was met where the Minister was presented with a person’s de facto family situation and the prospect that their de facto family members were likely to be granted leave to remain were not considered in the requisite weighing exercise undertaken when deciding to issue a deportation order.
Go Back

Subhan v Minister for Justice

emnadminLeave a Comment


Subhan v Minister for Justice
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2019] IECA 330
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial review/Appeal
Judgment Date/s:19 Dec 2019
Judge:Baker M
Category:Citizenship, Immigration law Free movement
Keywords:Dependant, Family Member, Free Movement, Freedom of Movement (Right to), Non-EU National
Country of Origin:United Kingdom, Pakistan.
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/19bc7313-7173-491a-b089-d476d2391f77/2019_IECA_330_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts The applicants were both born in Pakistan and were first cousins. The first applicant became a naturalised British citizen and subsequently moved to the State in exercise of his EU Treaty Rights. He applied for permission for his first cousin to join him in the State as a permitted family member on the basis that he was a member … Read More

Principles:A person who cohabits or lives under the same roof as a Union citizen is not, merely by reason of that cohabitation, to be considered a member of the Union citizen’s household. The key task of the decision maker was to ascertain whether the cohabitation or co-living arrangements are more than merely convenient, and whether the non-Union citizen family member is part of a cohesive, long term, coherent and single unit which might generally be called a “household”.
Go Back

Jones v Minister for Justice

emnadminLeave a Comment


Jones v Minister for Justice
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2019] IECA 285
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial review/Appeal
Judgment Date/s:14 Nov 2019
Judge:Whelan M
Category:Citizenship
Keywords:Citizenship, Citizenship (Acquisition of), Naturalisation
Country of Origin:Australia
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/31702c60-3d89-4ff8-a581-5ba6454fa1cf/2019_IECA_285_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts Section 15(1) of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended, provides, inter alia, that “Upon receipt of an application for a certificate of naturalisation, the Minister may, in his absolute discretion, grant the application, if satisfied that the applicant … (c) has had a period of one year’s continuous residence in the State immediately before the date … Read More

Principles:The term “continuous residence” should be given its ordinary and natural meaning and the Minister was entitled to adopt a policy that permitted up to six weeks’ absence from the State per year while remaining continuously resident in the State for the purposes of an application for naturalisation.
Go Back

AA v Minister for Justice

emnadminLeave a Comment

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2019] IECA 272
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial review/Appeal
Judgment Date/s:29 Oct 2019
Judge:Baker M
Category:Citizenship
Keywords:Citizenship, Citizenship (Acquisition of), Naturalisation
Country of Origin:Sudan
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/6fa3e072-a7c6-4342-9192-40c3aeace2fb/2019_IECA_272_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH
Geographic Focus:Sudan

Facts: the applicant was a Sudanese national who unsuccessfully applied for asylum in the State but was subsequently granted permission to reside in the State on the basis of marriage. The applicant had two children with her husband, both of whom were Irish citizens, and subsequently applied for naturalisation. The application was refused by the Minister on the basis that … Read More

Principles:The Minister was not entitled to refuse an application for naturalisation on good character grounds because the applicant had made an unsuccessful application for asylum in circumstances where her appeal against the refusal of refugee status was ultimately withdrawn because she had been granted permission to reside in the State on the basis of marriage.
Go Back

VK v Minister for Justice; Khan v Minister for Justice

emnadminLeave a Comment


VK v Minister for Justice; Khan v Minister for Justice
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2019] IECA 232
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial review/Appeal
Judgment Date/s:30 Jul 2019
Judge:Baker M
Category:Immigration law
Keywords:Dependant, Family Member, Free Movement, Freedom of Movement (Right to), Non-EU National
Country of Origin:Germany, Egypt, United Kingdom, Pakistan.
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/eff2dccb-f5cd-42a0-8e62-acccffa895b6/2019_IECA_232_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The VK case involved a German citizen who was married to an Egyptian citizen. They resided in the State under EU Treaty Rights and submitted an application to allow the wife’s Egyptian parents and sisters join them in the State as qualifying family members who were dependent on them. In the Khan case, the applicants were UK citizens who … Read More

Principles:The test for dependence is one of EU law and an applicant must show, in the light of his financial and social conditions, a real and not temporary dependence on a Union citizen. The concept of dependence is to be interpreted broadly and in the light of the perceived benefit of family unity and the principles of freedom of movement.
Go Back

NVU v Refugee Appeals Tribunal

emnadminLeave a Comment


NVU v Refugee Appeals Tribunal
Respondent/Defendant:Refugee Appeals Tribunal
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2019] IECA 183
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal/Judicial Review
Judgment Date/s:26 Jun 2019
Judge:Baker M
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum Applicant (Secondary Movement of), Dublin Regulation, Transfer Order
Country of Origin:Pakistan
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/31278c52-532f-445e-b1a1-ef95691a18d2/2019_IECA_183_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts This appeal concerned article 17 of the Dublin III Regulation which vests in Member States the discretion to deal with an application for refugee status on humanitarian or compassionate grounds where Dublin III would otherwise have resulted in that application being transferred to another Member State. The issue concerned the identity of the appropriate national authority to exercise the … Read More

Principles:The sovereign discretion in article 17 is exercisable in Irish law by the national asylum authorities and is not reserved to the Minister for Justice.
Go Back

MAM and KN v Minister for Justice

emnadminLeave a Comment


MAM and KN v Minister for Justice
Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2019] IECA 116
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal/Judicial Review
Judgment Date/s:29 Mar 2019
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Citizenship, Family Reunification, Refugee
Country of Origin:Somalia and Uzbekistan
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/0d59dddf-24bc-4f10-9b06-6e9055bdfc78/2019_IECA_116_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH
Geographic Focus:Other

Facts The issue raised in these proceedings was effectively whether a refugee who subsequently acquires Irish citizenship by naturalisation lost the right to family reunification pursuant to section 18 of the Refugee Act 1996. The evidence before the court was that between 2010 and 2017 the Minister for Justice accepted applications for family reunification from refugees who had acquired Irish … Read More

Principles:A refugee who has acquired Irish citizenship by naturalisation is no longer eligible for refugee family reunification.
Go Back

Agha v Minister for Social Protection; Osinuga v Minister for Social Protection

adminLeave a Comment

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Social Protection
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2018] IECA 155
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:06 May 2018
Judge:Hogan G.
Category:Citizenship, Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum, Child, Citizenship, Citizenship (Acquisition of), Discrimination (Indirect), Equal Treatment (Principle of), Immigration, Migrant (Irregular), Refugee, Refugee Law
Country of Origin:Afghanistan, Nigeria, Ireland
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/1117d422-fc42-41fe-8c30-88f03e2d04a5/2018_IECA_155_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH
Geographic Focus:Other

xAgha v Minister for Social Protection; Osinuga v Minister for Social Protection Agha; Osinuga Minister for Social Protection Facts: The appellants were two sets of parents who were refused payment of child benefit due to their immigration status. In the Agha case, the parents were Afghan nationals who arrived in Ireland in 2008. They lived in direct provision and had … Read More

Principles:

There was no objective justification for the statutory exclusion of an Irish citizen resident in the State from eligibility for child benefit prior to the grant of status to her mother in January 2016. Accordingly, this statutory exclusion constituted a breach of the equality provisions of Article 40.1 of the Constitution.

The statutory requirement that a qualifying parent for the purposes of social welfare payments must also have a legal entitlement to reside in the State was not unconstitutional. The key issue was that of citizenship. The Oireachtas was entitled to attach conditions to the eligibility for social welfare of a non-national whose entitlement to reside in the State was contingent on a statutory entitlement. However, social welfare was payable in respect of a person from the date of the grant of refugee status in accordance with Article 28 of the Qualification Directive and insofar as Irish law precluded this payment based on the status of the child’s parents, this was incompatible with EU law.

Go Back

HN v International Protection Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Attorney General

emnadmin

Respondent/Defendant:International Protection Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Attorney General
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2018] IECA 102
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal/Judicial Review
Judgment Date/s:19 Apr 2018
Judge:Hogan G.
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum, Asylum application (Examination of an), Dublin Regulation
Country of Origin:Afghanistan
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/73a849bf-89a5-4d52-bcc1-466e2b4344f5/2018_IECA_102_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The applicant was an Afghan national who applied for asylum in the State. A Eurodac search subsequently revealed that he had previously applied for asylum in the United Kingdom and the Refugee Applications Commissioner subsequently made a decision to transfer the applicant to the United Kingdom pursuant to the Dublin III Regulation. The applicant appealed this decision to the … Read More

Principles:There were arguable grounds that the International Protection Appeals Tribunal erred in law by ruling that it had no jurisdiction to exercise the jurisdiction conferred by Article 17(1) of the Dublin III Regulation and by failing to consider the consequences for the applicant’s mental health of physically transporting him from Ireland to the United Kingdom and all the significant and permanent consequences that might arise from such a transfer.
Go Back

MIF v International Protection Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Attorney General

emnadminLeave a Comment

Respondent/Defendant:International Protection Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Attorney General
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal/Judicial Review
Judgment Date/s:19 Feb 2018
Judge:Hogan G.
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum, Asylum Applicant (Examination of an), Asylum Applicant (Secondary Movement of), Asylum shopping, Dublin Regulation, Geneva Convention and Protocol
Country of Origin:Pakistan
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/1fdfdf7c-9a22-4e8e-8373-93b3d793d31e/2018_IECA_36_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The applicant was a Pakistani national who applied for asylum in the State. A Eurodac search subsequently revealed that he had previously resided in the United Kingdom and the Refugee Applications Commissioner subsequently made a decision to transfer the applicant to the United Kingdom pursuant to the Dublin III Regulation. The applicant appealed this decision to the International Protection … Read More

Principles:Article 31 of the Refugee Convention did not confer an open-ended choice on asylum seekers as to the country where they would submit their application for asylum. The Dublin III Regulation provides for a system of jurisdiction allocation between Member States which is designed to avoid forum shopping and potentially abusive applications in a multiplicity of States, as expressly contemplated by Article 78(2)(e) of the TFEU. It could not be said that the Dublin Regulation, which was expressly authorised by the Treaties, was unlawful on the ground that it was contrary to an international treaty such as the Refugee Convention which, in any event, was not in itself part of the law of the European Union
Go Back

BW v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

adminLeave a Comment

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2017] IECA 296
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:15 Nov 2017
Judge:Peart M.
Category:Refugee Law
Keywords:Asylum (Application for), Protection (Application for International), Refugee, Refugee Law
Country of Origin:Nigeria
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/d350b5b9-b21e-4d90-81dc-c43f7a116232/2017_IECA_296_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH
Geographic Focus:Other

Facts: The applicant came to Ireland from Nigeria in 2007. She applied for refugee status in 2011. Her application was unsuccessful. She appealed to the first respondent. The appeal was a papers only appeal. The appeal was unsuccessful. The Refugee Appeals Tribunal made adverse credibility findings based on matters that had not been put to the applicant and concluded that … Read More

Principles:

Where an issue of concern emerged for the first time on a papers only appeal in relation to a matter which the appellant had not already had a fair opportunity to address and that concern was in relation to something material to the basis on which asylum was being sought, and therefore to the decision whether or not she be granted a declaration of refugee status, the appellant was as a matter of fair procedures entitled to an opportunity to address it before any adverse finding of credibility was made against her.

Go Back