Facts The applicant was a national of Molova who applied for asylum in the State and was unsuccessful. He was also refused subsidiary protection and a deportation order was made against him. The applicant argued inter alia that the process by which the subsidiary protection scheme operated in Ireland with the deportation/leave to remain procedure was in breach of EU … Read More
VJ (Moldova) v Minister for Justice and Equality
| Respondent/Defendant: | Minister for Justice and Equality |
| Court/s: | High Court |
| Citation/s: | [2012] IEHC 337 |
| Nature of Proceedings: | Judicial Review |
| Judgment Date/s: | 31 Jul 2012 |
| Judge: | Cooke J |
| Category: | Deportation, Refugee Law |
| Keywords: | Asylum, Deportation, Protection, Protection (Application for International), Protection (International), Protection (Subsidiary), Refugee, Return, Return Decision, Returnee |
| Country of Origin: | Moldova |
| URL: | https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/cf2952a2-d160-46c2-a64b-d7680ae940c0/2012_IEHC_337_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH |
| Geographic Focus: | Ireland |
| Principles: | It is arguable that: “By confining the right to apply for subsidiary protection to the circumstance in which the asylum seeker’s entitlement to remain lawfully in the State pursuant to s. 9(2) of the Refugee Act 1996, has expired and a decision has been taken to propose the deportation of the applicant under section 3(3) of the Immigration Act 1999, Regulation 4(1) of the 2006 Regulations in conjunction with s. 3 of the said Act of 1999, has the effect of imposing a precondition or disadvantage upon a subsidiary protection applicant which is ultra vires Council Directive 2004/83/EC of the 29th April, 2004, and is incompatible with general principles of European Union law.” |