N (O.G.) v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and David Andrews Sitting as the Refugee Appeals Commissioner

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Brian McGovern
• Judgment Date: 05 February 2009
• Neutral Citation: [2009] IEHC 56
• Docket Number: [No. 483 J.R./2007]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 05 February 2009

[2009] IEHC 56

THE HIGH COURT

[No. 483 J.R./2007]

N (O G) v Min for Justice & Refugee Appeals Tribunal (Andrews)

JUDICIAL REVIEW

IN THE MATTER OF THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (TRAFFICKING) ACT 2000

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE REFUGEE ACT 1996 (AS AMENDED)

BETWEEN

O.G.N.

APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM AND DAVID ANDREWS SITTING AS THE REFUGEE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

RESPONDENTS

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (TRAFFICKING) ACT 2000

REFUGEE ACT 1996

Abstract:

Immigration - Asylum - Judicial review - Certiorari - UNHCR Guidelines - ‘Internal flight’ and ‘relocation principle’ - Test to be applied

Facts: The applicant sought Judicial Review of a decision of the respondents refusing refugee status.

Held by McGovern J granting the application:

The applicant had established substantial grounds of the failure of the second named respondent to have regard to the correct UNHCR guidelines on international protection.

As the Tribunal Member’s decision on refugee status was connected to the principle of internal relocation, this met the test of the applicant to show substantial grounds that he has an arguable case

Reporter: BD

Mr. Justice Brian McGovern

1 This is an application for leave to apply, by way of judicial review, for an order ofcertiorari quashing the decision of the second named respondent dated 19^th April, 2007, affirming a recommendation of the Refugee Applications Commissioner dated 27^th January, 2007, that the applicant should not be declared a refugee. The applicant also seeks consequential relief against the first named respondent.

2 The applicant has to establish substantial grounds before the court can grant leave.

3 Having considered the papers in this matter, and the submissions made by counsel, I have come to the view that the applicant has established substantial grounds in his application for leave to apply for judicial review on one point, namely, the failure of the second named respondent to have regard to the correct UNHCR guidelines on international protection.

4 In his decision, the second named respondent states that he took note of the UNHCR position paper on"relocating internally as a reasonable alternative to seeking asylum - (the so-called 'internal flight' or 'relocation principle')" dated February 1999.

5 It appears that this position paper has been superseded by the UNHCR guidelines on...