M.O.S.H (Pakistan) v Refugee Appeals Tribunal and Others

 
FREE EXCERPT

[2015] IEHC 331

THE HIGH COURT

[No. 378 J.R./2011]
H (MOS) [Pakistan] v Refugee Appeals Tribunal & Ors
JUDICIAL REVIEW

BETWEEN

M.O.S.H (PAKISTAN)
APPLICANT

AND

THE REFUGEE APPEALS TRIBUNAL, THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND IRELAND
RESPONDENTS

2011/378JR - Eagar - High - 21/5/2015 - 2015 IEHC 331

Asylum – Immigration & Nationality – The Refugee Appeals Tribunal – S. 5(3) (a) Illegal Immigrants Trafficking Act 2000 – Leave to appeal – Test of irrationality in judicial review

1

1. On the 27 th March 2015 this Court gave judgment on an application for judicial review and quashed the decision of the first named respondent to affirm the recommendation of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and made an order remitting the appeal of the applicant for a determination de novo by a separate member of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

2

2. The respondent now applies under s. 5(3)(a) of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000 for a certificate of leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal on the basis that the judgment "involves a point of law of exceptional public importance" and that "it is desirable in the public interest that such an appeal be taken". The criteria to be applied by this Court in ruling on the application for a certificate under s. 5(3)(a) are not in dispute.

3

3. Following from the decisions of Cooke J. in I.R. v. The Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform & Refugee Appeals Tribunal [2009] IEHC 510 and the decision of Clarke J. in Arklow Holidays v. An Bord Pleanala [2007] 4 I.R. 112 I say the following principles appear to apply:-

1

) The case must raise a point of law of exceptional public importance.

2

) The area of law involved must be uncertain such that it is in the common good that the uncertainty be resolved for the benefit of future cases.

3

) That it is desirable in the public interest that an appeal should be taken to the Court of Appeal.

4

) The uncertainty as to the point of law must be genuine and not merely a difficulty in predicting the outcome of the applicant' arguments.

5

) The point of law must arise out of the court's decision and not merely out of some discussion at the hearing.

6

) The requirements of exceptional public importance and the desirability of an appeal in the public interest are cumulative requirements.

7

) The importance of the point must be public in nature and must therefore transcend...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL