O v Minister for Justice and Equality

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Clarke C.J.,Dunne J.,Baker J.
• Judgment Date: 15 November 2020
• Neutral Citation: [2020] IESCDET 138
• Court: Supreme Court
• Docket Number: Supreme Court record no: S:AP:IE:2020:000087 High Court record no: 2011 No. 834 JR

BETWEEN

TO

APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY IRELAND

AND

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

RESPONDENTS

[2020] IESCDET 138

Clarke C.J.

Dunne J.

Baker J.

Supreme Court record no: S:AP:IE:2020:000087

Court of Appeal record no: A:AP:IE:2018:000194

High Court record no: 2011 No. 834 JR

THE SUPREME COURT

DETERMINATION

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO WHICH ARTICLE 34.5.3° OF THE CONSTITUTION APPLIES

RESULT: The Court does not grant leave to the Applicant to appeal to this Court from the Court of Appeal

REASONS GIVEN:

ORDER SOUGHT TO BE APPEALED

COURT: Court of Appeal

DATE OF JUDGMENT OR RULING: 27 th February, 2020

DATE OF ORDER: 13 th March, 2020

DATE OF PERFECTION OF ORDER: 23 rd June, 2020

THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL WAS MADE ON 13 th August, 2020 AND WAS NOT IN TIME.

General Considerations

1 The general principles applied by this Court in determining whether to grant or refuse leave to appeal having regard to the criteria incorporated into the Constitution as a result of the Thirty-third Amendment have now been considered in a large number of determinations and are fully addressed in both a determination issued by a panel consisting of all of the members of this Court in B. S. v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2017] IESCDET 134 and in a unanimous judgment of a full Court delivered by O'Donnell J. in Quinn Insurance Ltd. v. PricewaterhouseCoopers [2017] IESC 73, [2017] 3 IR 812. It follows that it is unnecessary to revisit the new constitutional architecture for the purposes of this determination.

2 Furthermore, the application for leave filed and the respondent's notice are published along with this determination (subject only to any redaction required by law) and it is therefore unnecessary to set out the position of the parties.

3 Any ruling in a determination concerns whether the facts and legal issues meet the constitutional criteria identified above, is particular to that application, and is final and conclusive only to that extent and as between the parties.

4 The respondent is opposed to the application for leave to appeal.

The Application

5 This is the application of TO (“the applicant”) for leave to appeal to this Court pursuant to the provisions of Article 34.5.3° of the Constitution from the order of the Court of Appeal of 13 March 2020 for the reasons in a written judgment of 27 February 2020 (Faherty J., with whom Haughton and Power JJ. agreed), by which the Court upheld the decision of the Humphreys J. ( [2018] IEHC 256) dismissing her application for judicial review of the Minister's refusal to grant her subsidiary protection, [2020] IECA 184.

6 The challenge was to the system of subsidiary protection in S.I. 518/2006 transpo...