Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This is an application seeking leave to issue Judicial Review for the purpose of seeking "an Order of Certiorari quashing the decision to refuse the applicants refugee status". The Statement of Grounds does not identify the decision but the grounding affidavits indicate that the decisions sought to be challenged are decisions of the Refugee Applications Commissioner communicated by letters dated 5 th November 2002 to the applicants. Notwithstanding, the Refugee Applications Commissioner is not joined as a respondent.
The application to seek leave to apply for an Order of Certiorari of a decision of the Refugee Applications Commissioner is subject to the provisions of s.5 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act, 2000 and accordingly must have been brought on notice to the respondent. Further this court is precluded from granting leave by reason of s.5(2)(b) unless the applicants satisfy the court that they are substantial grounds for contending that the decision is invalid or ought to be quashed.
The application is grounded upon an affidavit of the solicitor for the applicants Mr. Nial Sheeran and an affidavit of the first named applicant. The grounds sought to be relied upon in the Statement of Grounds are set out at par. 5(a) to (l) inclusive.
The Statement of Grounds also seeks a declaration "that the provisions of s. 19 of the Refugee Act, 1996 are void having regard to the provisions of Bunreacht na h�ireann". This relief is not subject to the provisions of s.5 of the Act of 2000. It was not proceeded with at the hearing before me and I would observe that the Statement of Grounds does not set out any substantive ground which would warrant granting leave even on an ex parte basis to seek such relief.
It is assumed that the applicants made an application for a Declaration of Refugee Status in the normal way. Mr. Sheeran in his Affidavit deposes to the fact that they were interviewed on behalf of the Refugee Applications Commissioner on the 4 th September, 2001 and were legally represented by his firm at those interviews. Such interviews normally follow the making of an application for a declaration of refugee status.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.