P.E. (Nigeria) v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Others
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Mr. Justice Eagar |
| Judgment Date | 11 March 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] IEHC 155 |
| Court | High Court |
| Date | 11 March 2015 |
[2015] IEHC 155
THE HIGH COURT
BETWEEN
Asylum – Refugee status – Telescoped hearing – Order for certiorari – Well-founded fear of persecution not made out – s.2 Refugee Act 1996 – Social group – Internal relocation
Facts: The Applicant is a Nigerian citizen. She is a widow and has two adult children. She left Nigeria and came to Ireland in July 2010. She worked as a cleaning lady for a few months before applying for asylum in September 2010. She filed the requisite forms, completed a refugee status questionnaire and attended an interview with the Refugee Applications Commissioner. A finding was made that she was not at risk for reasons of nationality, political beliefs, religious beliefs, race or membership of a social group as required by s. 2 of the Refugee Act 1996. A recommendation was also made in relation to s. 13 (6) (c) of the Refugee Act 1996 as she failed to make an asylum application as soon as reasonably practicable after arrival in the State. The negative recommendation was upheld on appeal. The Applicant was a farmer in Nigeria. Her brother-in-law wanted her land after her husband died but she had already sold the land for about €3,500 in order to pay for her travel to Ireland. She did not go to the police with the issue and failed to get the authorities to assist her. She stated her brother-in-law would seek to kill her over the land.
The second named Respondent found the Applicant”s version highly unlikely and arrived at the conclusion that she did not come within a “social group” in the definition of a refugee having regard to s. 2 of the Refugee Act 1996. It was further submitted that the Applicant”s claim fell outside the Convention and thus internal relocation was not open to her.
Held The judge could see no fault in the decision of the second named Respondent that would warrant an order of certiorari.
-Relief sought refused
1. This is a telescoped hearing of an application for an order of certiorari quashing the decision of the second named Respondent that the Applicant had failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution as defined under s.2 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended).
2. The Applicant is a citizen of Nigeria. Her date of birth is 10 th October 1955. She is a widow as her husband died on the 5 th December 2008. She has two adult children. She left Nigeria on the 14 th July 2010 and came to Ireland on the 15 th July 2010. She worked as a cleaner for two months before coming to the Refugee Applications Commissioner to apply for asylum on the 15 th September 2010. She completed on that date an ASY1 Form and an application for refugee status questionnaire on the 23 rd September 2010. She had an interview with the Refugee Applications Commissioner on the 7 th November 2010 and the finding and recommendation of the Refugee Applications Commissioner was that the Applicant was not at risk for reasons of nationality, political beliefs, religious beliefs, race or membership of a social group as required by s. 2 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended) and had failed to establish a nexus to s. 2 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended). There was also a recommendation that s. 13 (6) (c) of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended) would apply as the Applicant had failed to make an application as soon as reasonably practicable after arrival in the State.
3. Notice of appeal was lodged by her solicitors and the second named Respondent made a decision on the 27 th January 2011 affirming the recommendation of the Refugee Applications Commissioner in relation to the application for refugee status.
4. The Applicant is a Jehovah Witness and is an Ibo of ethnic origin. She is a farmer and states she never applied for asylum in Ireland or any other country previously. She has no family in Ireland.
5. The core of the Applicant's problem is that the Applicant's brother-in-law sought her land after her husband died. The Applicant then sold the land in January 2010 for about €3,500. She had lived with a friend until she left Nigeria. She made up the rest of the monies that she had to give for travelling by selling her property such as her fridge and clothes. She decided to go to Ireland where she decided to work as a cleaning lady or child minder and she worked in a house for about two months.
6. The second named Respondent stated at the outset that the notice of appeal had been studied in depth and applied to this decision and set against the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas Loomes Practising Under The Style and Title of Thomas Loomes and Company v Rippington and Others
...should be remitted to the High Court or the bill sent for adjudication, Allen J recalled the observation of Hogan J in Landers v Dixon [2015] IEHC 155 that no judge of the High Court would see himself or herself as possessing expertise in costs equivalent to that of a legal costs adjudicato......