Facts:The first and second named applicants were, respectively, a Nigerian mother and her son. She arrived in the State in 2006 and her son was born here that same year. She claimed to have fled Nigeria in fear of persecution from her mother-in-law and her husband, whom she claimed had been violent to her and had threatened to take custody … Read More
TA and OJO (a minor) v Refugee Appeals Tribunal, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Ireland and the Attorney General
| Respondent/Defendant: | Refugee Appeals Tribunal, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Ireland and the Attorney General |
| Court/s: | High Court |
| Citation/s: | [2014] IEHC 204 |
| Nature of Proceedings: | Judicial Review |
| Judgment Date/s: | 03 Apr 2014 |
| Judge: | MacEochaidh J. |
| Category: | Refugee Law |
| Keywords: | Asylum, Persecution, Refugee, Refugee (Convention), Refugee Law, Refugee Status |
| Country of Origin: | Nigeria |
| URL: | http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/BCF5B17194B1A3E280257CC5003680CF |
| Geographic Focus: | Ireland |
| Principles: | A protection decision-maker is entitled to make an adverse credibility finding on an asylum application where contradictions and inconsistencies surround a material piece of evidence. A protection decision-maker like the Tribunal is obliged to give a reasonable opportunity to an asylum applicant to know the matters likely to affect its decision on his or her claim, it is not required to enter into a debate with him or her. Unless there are specific factors capable of supporting a contention that delay in making a determination on protection application has rendered the eventual decision unlawful or invalid, such delay cannot, of itself, amount to a substantial ground for contending that the decision is invalid. |