Facts: The applicant was an Egyptian national who claimed to have arrived in Ireland by boat, disembarking at Waterford Port in February, 2006, and making his way by bus to Dublin thereafter. He claimed that he did not apply for asylum immediately upon arrival in Ireland, as he was told by certain people he knew that if he made an … Read More
IG v Refugee Appeals Tribunal and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
| Respondent/Defendant: | Refugee Appeals Tribunal and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform |
| Court/s: | High Court |
| Citation/s: | [2014] IEHC 207 |
| Nature of Proceedings: | Judicial Review |
| Judgment Date/s: | 11 Apr 2014 |
| Judge: | MacEochaidh J. |
| Category: | Refugee Law |
| Keywords: | Asylum, Asylum application (Examination of an), Persecution, Refugee, Refugee (Convention), Refugee Law, Refugee Status |
| Country of Origin: | Egypt |
| URL: | https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/d8c88f17-3d5b-4889-aed8-8119d099028e/2014_IEHC_207_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH |
| Geographic Focus: | Ireland |
| Principles: | An applicant who has been notified of the making of a s. 13(1) report by the Refugee Applications Commissioner has a duty, as an active participant in the asylum process, to take issue with any findings in it with which he disagrees on appeal to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. A genuine mistake in failing to do so may provide an unsuccessful applicant with an entitlement to apply for re-entry to the asylum process pursuant to s. 17(7) of the Refugee Act 1996. It will not be a satisfactory explanation for delay in claiming asylum to argue that it was motivated by fear of deportation, relying on an unsubstantiated reference to an allegedly low refugee recognition rate. |