A.A. (Pakistan) v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys
• Judgment Date: 18 December 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IEHC 769
• Docket Number: [2018 No. 198 J.R.]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 18 December 2018

[2018] IEHC 769

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Humphreys J.

[2018 No. 198 J.R.]

BETWEEN

A.A. (PAKISTAN)

APPLICANT

AND

THE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION APPEALS TRIBUNAL, THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY, IRELAND

AND

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

RESPONDENTS

Asylum, Immigration and Nationality – Judicial Review – Certiorari– Applicant seeking order of certiorari removing the IPAT decision refusing subsidiary protection – Whether the IPAT erred in their decision to refuse subsidiary protection to the applicant

Facts: The applicant claimed he was born in Pakistan and had problems with the Taliban and Lashkar-e-Islam. He came to the U.K. on a student visa in 2011 which was cancelled in 2014. During that period the applicant claimed his father and uncle were killed in Pakistan. He did not apply for asylum in the U.K. The applicant came to Ireland in 2015 and applied for subsidiary protection which was refused. His appeal to the International Protection Appeals Tribunal was refused and leave was granted for judicial review. The applicant argued, inter alia, that the tribunal erred in finding that the applicant’s failure to apply for asylum in the U.K. undermined his credibility, and that the tribunal erred in failing to give proper weight to documentary evidence which was not verified. The applicant sought an order of certiorari removing the IPAT decision.

Held by Humphreys J that the tribunal was entitled to consider the fact that the applicant did not apply for asylum in the U.K. when determining the applicant’s credibility. The evidence illustrated that the applicant’s decision not to apply for asylum in the U.K. was tactical and this undermined his claim. With regard to the documentary evidence, Humphreys J noted that there was no obligation on the IPO or the IPAT to contact third parties within the country of origin to seek verification of documents submitted by the applicant in his case. Where a document cannot be verified on the evidence before the tribunal it can be discounted or regarded as being of limited probative value.

Relief denied.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 18th day of December, 2018

1 The applicant claims to have been born in Pakistan in 1989. He claims to have had problems with the Taliban and Lashkar-e-Islam (L.I.) He left Pakistan in June, 2011 for the U.K. on a student visa. The college closed in 2014 and the visa was cancelled. He says he made some sort of application to remain in the U.K. but cannot remember the outcome. He claims that the Taliban/L.I. delivered warning letters to the family home in 2012 and that his father was killed in September, 2012. He also claims that his uncle was killed. He never applied for asylum in the U.K.

2 He came to Ireland in early August, 2015 and applied to the Refugee Applications Commissioner for asylum on 4th August, 2015. That was refused on 2nd August, 2016. He appealed that refusal to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal on 10th November, 2016. Following the commencement of the International Protection Act 2015, he applied for subsidiary protection. That was refused on 21st August, 2017. On 19th September, 2017, he appealed that refusal to the International Protection Appeals Tribunal. On 29th November, 2017, written submissions were delivered by the applicant, signed by Mr. Eamonn Dornan B.L., which relied inter alia on the decision of the High Court in A.O. v. Refugee Appeals Tribunal [2015] IEHC 253 (Unreported, Barr J., 17th April, 2015), although by that stage the decision had been reversed on appeal in A.O. v. Refugee Appeals Tribunal [2017] IECA 51 (Unreported, Court of Appeal, 27th February, 2017), a point noted by the tribunal in its written decision.

3 On 12th December, 2017 an oral hearing took place before the tribunal. Mr. Dornan appeared for the applicant and Ms. Irene Fisher B.L. for the International Protection Office. On 29th January, 2018 the IPAT refused the appeals. Without in any way to be taken as encouraging lengthy decisions, this was an unusually detailed 50-page tribunal decision which rejected the credibility of the applicant's account in many respects. It considered that the failure to seek asylum in the U.K. undermined the claim and that the account was inconsistent. Most documents produced were held to be of limited probative value.

4 Proceedings were filed on 9th March, 2018, around two weeks out of time. The leave order does not expressly extend time but I accept the applicant's explanation for the delay in the circumstances as set out on affidavit by Ms. Cristina Stamatescu, solicitor, so I will formally do that now. On 12th March, 2018, I granted leave. The statement of opposition was delivered on 22nd October, 2018. The applicant's submissions were delivered on 19th November, 2018 and the respondent's submissions on 7th December, 2018. I have received submissions from Mr. Dornan for the...