B.D.C.(Nigeria) v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys
• Judgment Date: 20 July 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IEHC 460
• Docket Number: [2017 No. 983 J.R.]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 20 July 2018

BETWEEN

B.D.C. (NIGERIA)

AND

A.M.C.D (A MINOR SUING BY HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND B.D.C.)

APPLICANTS

AND

THE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION APPEALS TRIBUNAL, THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

AND

IRELAND

RESPONDENTS

[2018] IEHC 460

Humphreys J.

[2017 No. 983 J.R.]

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Immigration and asylum – Adverse credibility – UNHCR guidelines – Applicant seeking certiorari of respondent’s decisions – Whether the applicant’s account was credible

Facts: The first applicant, a Nigerian national, arrived in Ireland on 21st September, 2014 and sought asylum. Her child, the second applicant, was born on 9th December, 2014 and an asylum application was made on his behalf. On 31st July, 2015, she was informed that both applications had been rejected. Those decisions were appealed to the first respondent, the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT), and on 2nd November, 2017, the tribunal rejected the appeals. Humphreys J granted leave to appeal to the High Court on 14th December, 2017, the primary relief sought being certiorari of the IPAT decisions, and an extension of time was also granted. The applicants’ challenge concerned the adverse credibility findings and the alleged failure to consider UNHCR guidelines.

Held by Humphreys J that the tribunal member saw and heard the first applicant, and was best placed to assess whether her account was credible. Humphreys J held that the applicants’ challenge had not demonstrated clear or indeed any grounds on which that assessment should be disturbed. Humphreys J held that the failure to refer explicitly to UNHCR guidelines is not equivalent to ignoring such guidelines and was not a ground for judicial review.

Humphreys J held that the application would be dismissed.

Application dismissed.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 20th day of July, 2018

1 The first named applicant is a Nigerian national, born in 1979. She claims to be a Christian and claims that her family moved from Lagos to Mafa town in Borno State in 2004 to escape violence caused by her uncle relating to a property dispute. She claimed to have had a relationship with a Muslim man who she persuaded to convert to Christianity. She says that she had two children with this man, that he was subsequently kidnapped and disappeared and that this was perpetrated by members of Boko Haram. She then says she moved to Lagos and began a relationship with another man and became pregnant, that on informing him of this she was evicted, and that she then fled Nigeria in fear of her life and freedom.

2 In 2010, she applied for a U.K. visa with her then partner. She had denied in her asylum questionnaire here that she had ever applied for any other visa. In the U.K. application, she gave an incorrect date of birth and an altered name for her partner. She gave inadequate or inconsistent answers in relation to these matters.

3 She arrived in Ireland on 21st September, 2014 and sought asylum. Her child, the second named applicant, was born on 9th December, 2014 and an asylum application was made on his behalf. On 31st July, 2015, she was informed that both applications had been rejected.

4 Those decisions were appealed to the tribunal and on 2nd November, 2017, in decisions by Mr. Mark Byrne, the tribunal rejected the appeals. The applicants were so notified by letters dated 3rd November, 2017. I granted leave in the present proceedings on 14th December, 2017, the primary relief sought being certiorari of the IPAT decisions, and an extension of time was also granted. The statement of opposition was filed on 14th February, 2018 and no objection to the extension of time is raised.

5 I have received helpful submissions from Mr. Garry O'Halloran B.L. for the applicants and Ms. Cathy Smith B.L. for the respondents; and without in...