A B-M v Minister for Justice

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Diarmuid B. O'Donovan
• Judgment Date: 23 July 2001
• Neutral Citation: [2001] IEHC 110
• Docket Number: No. 79 JR/2000
• Court: High Court
• Date: 23 July 2001

B-M (A) v. MINISTER FOR JUSTICE EQUALITY & LAW REFORM & INTERIM REFUGEE APPEALS AUTHORITY & AG

JUDICIAL REVIEW

BETWEEN

A.B.-M.

APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM AND THEINTERIM REFUGEE APPEALS AUTHORITY AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

RESPONDENTS

[2001] IEHC 110

No. 79 JR/2000

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis

IMMIGRATION

Asylum

Judicial Review - Certiorari - Fair procedures - Mistake of fact - Whether fundamental error on face of record - Refugee Act, 1996 (Appeals) Regulations, 2000 SI 342/2000 (2000/79JR - O'Donovan J - 23/7/01)

B - M(A) v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Interim Refugee Appeals Authority

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision to refuse him refugee status. The applicant claimed that the decision offended against fair procedures and also claimed that there was a mistake made as to the applicant's country of origin. O'Donovan J was satisfied that the mistake that had been made with regard to the applicant's country of origin meant that the decision to refuse the applicant refugee status was made without jurisdiction and must be quashed.

Citations:

HOPE HANLAN LETTER (PROCEDURES)

REFUGEE ACT (APPEALS) REGS 2000 SI 342/2000

O'DONOGHUE V VETERINARY COUNCIL 1975 IR 398

CORUS IOMPAR EIREANN (CIE), STATE V BORD PLEANALA UNREP SUPREME 12.12.85 1984/6/1813

HOLLAND, STATE V KENNEDY 1977 IR 193

REFUGEE ACT 1996 S2

1 Mr. Justice Diarmuid B. O'Donovandelivered on the 23rd of July, 2001

2 This is an application for Judicial Review pursuant to leave granted to the Applicant by order of Mr. Justice Andrias O'Caoimh dated the 29th of February, 2000. It is unnecessary, I think, to recite all the precise reliefs set out in the Applicant's Statement of the grounds upon which Judicial Review is sought by him, or indeed, the details of Mr. Justice O'Caoimh's Order. It is sufficient, in my view, that I should summarise what appear to me to be the essential reliefs sought by the Applicant which are;

3 Orders of Certiorari quashing a recommendation dated the 13th day of July, 1999 by Mr. Aidan Eames, an Appeals Authority appointed by the first named Respondent, that the Applicant's appeal against a refusal to recognise his refugee status be disallowed and a decision dated the 30th of July, 1999 by Ms. Linda Grealy of the Asylum Division of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform; an officer duly authorised by the first named Respondent, to uphold the said recommendation.

4 Essentially, the grounds upon which the Applicant relies in support of his application for the reliefs aforesaid are;

5 (a) That the procedures followed by the first named Respondent with regard to the Applicants appeal against a refusal to recognise his refugee status were unfair and lacked impartiality, in that, the recommendation aforesaid and the decision thereon were both made by officers duly appointed by and representing the interests of the first named Respondent whereby, in effect, the first named Respondent acted as a Judge in his own cause thereby offending a basic principle of Irishlaw

6 (b) There was a fundamental error on the face of the record of the recommendation aforesaid, in that, in the title thereof the Applicant is referred to as being from the democratic Republic of Congo and in the text thereof is referred to as being from Zaire whereas the fact of the matter is and was that he is a native of the Republic of Congo and applied for asylum as such.

7 At the time of the events which gave rise to this application, the procedure for appealing against a recommendation that a person should not be granted refugee status was entirely administrative and was based on procedures governing applications for asylum notified to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees on the 10th of December, 1997, as amended, which procedures are known as the "Hope Hanlonprocedures". Since then, the Refugee Act 1996(Appeals) Regulations 2000 (S.I. No. 342 of 2000) which came into operation on the 20th day of November, 2000 have been enacted. These regulations make provision for procedures to be followed in the event of an appeal against a recommendation that an Applicant should not be granted refugee status and, essentially, provide that such an appeal shall be considered by an independent refugee appeals tribunal. However, prior to the enactment of those regulations and, in particular, insofar as this Applicant's application for refugee status is concerned, his appeal against the decision of the first named Respondent to refuse him refugee status was heard by the second named Respondent (Mr. Aidan Eames), who was appointed by the first named Respondent for thatpurpose and, in turn, the recommendation of the second named Respondent following the hearing of that appeal was considered and adjudicated upon by an officer in the Asylum Division of the...