BA v Refugee Applications Commissioner

CourtHigh Court
JudgeMr. Justice Richard Humphreys
Judgment Date21 November 2016
Neutral Citation[2016] IEHC 672
Docket Number[2016 No. 741 J.R.]
Date21 November 2016

[2016] IEHC 672



Humphreys J.

[2016 No. 741 J.R.]


Asylum, Immigration & Nationality – S. 5 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act, 2000 – Application for Judicial Review – New Information adverse to the applicant

Facts: The applicant sought leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the respondent. The respondent interviewed the applicant in connection with his asylum claim, following which enquiries were conducted by the respondent, which had suggested the possession of additional personal identifying documents in the possession of the applicant. Subsequently, the respondent drew very significant adverse consequences. The applicant contended that the respondent was under duty to inform the applicant before making such adverse findings against him.

Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys granted leave to the applicant only on the ground that there was a failure by the respondent in not informing the applicant while scrutinising new information pertaining to the asylum claim of the applicant. The Court followed the view expressed in B.W. v. Refugee Appeals Tribunal (No. 2) [2015] IEHC 759 that where a decision maker came into possession of new information, which gave rise to ‘a material change, adverse to the applicant,’ then as a matter of generality, new information should be put to the claimant. The Court observed that there were substantial grounds for contending that the present case was one of the exceptional circumstances envisaged by Hedigan J. in B.N.N. v. Minister for Justice [2009] 1 I.R. 719 whereby a decision of the Commissioner could be challenged without the applicant having to exhaust the normal remedy of appeal to the tribunal. The Court refused the leave to pursue the remaining grounds.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 21st day of November, 2016

The applicant attended for interview with the Refugee Applications Commissioner in connection with his asylum claim on 9th November, 2015. Following that interview, the commissioner made enquiries with the applicant's bank and the Registrar of Civil Marriages. Those enquiries suggested that the applicant was in possession of additional personal identifying documents which he failed to disclose to the commissioner. The commissioner did not revert to the applicant for comment in relation to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • MYA v Refugee Appeals Commissioner
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 13 Febrero 2017
    ...I refused leave to the first five applicants referred to in the title to this judgment. 2 In B.A. v. Refugee Applications Commissioner [2016] IEHC 672 (Unreported, High Court, 14th November, 2016), I granted leave to the sixth applicant on certain grounds but declined to give leave on the g......
  • D.F.S. (Also Known as D.M.)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 6 Marzo 2017
    ...general advices on the merits of the within proceedings. This apparently arose because of the judgment of Humphreys J. in B.A. v. RAC [2016] IEHC 672 which was delivered on the 21st November, 2016 and suggested that the BNN test might be surmounted. Mr. Phelan does not however deal with th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT