VR v Refugee Appeals Tribunal

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 12 February 2003
• Date: 12 February 2003
• Docket Number: [2002 No. 213 J.R.]
• Court: High Court

High Court

[2002 No. 213 J.R.]

v. R. v. Refugee Appeals Tribunal

V.R.

Applicant

and

Refugee Appeals Tribunal, Ireland and The Attorney General

Respondents

There are no cases mentioned in this report.

Aliens - Application for refugee status - Refusal - Appeal - Notification of making of appeal - United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees - Whether first respondent obliged to furnish High Commissioner with copy of grounds of appeal - Whether information furnished to commissioner sufficient to discharge obligation on Refugee Appeals Tribunal under s. 16(4) - Refugee Act 1996 (No. 17), s. 16(4).

Judicial review.

The facts have been summarised in the headnote and are more fully set out in the judgment of Finlay Geoghegan J., infra.

The applicant was granted leave to apply for judicial review by the High Court (Smyth J.) on the 31st July, 2002. The applicant's motion on notice seeking an order of certiorari was filed on the 13th August, 2002.

The application was heard by the High Court (Finlay Geoghegan J.) on the 4th February, 2003.

Section 16 of the Refugee Act 1996, as amended, provides for the making of appeals by applicants for asylum to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal against refusals made by the Refugee Applications Commissioner. Section 16(3) provides that an appeal shall be brought by notice in writing. Section 16(4) provides as follows:-

"The Tribunal shall transmit a copy of the notice received by it under subsection (3) to the Commissioner and notification of the making of the appeal to the High Commissioner."

The applicant sought an order of certiorari of a decision of the first respondent rejecting his appeal against a refusal of his application for refugee status. Notification of the making of the appeal had been sent by e-mail to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees indicating the file number, name and nationality of the applicant and the date the appeal had been received.

Counsel for the applicant submitted that information furnished by the first respondent to the High Commissioner was insufficient and that it was obliged to furnish the High Commissioner with a copy of further particulars of the appeal, including the grounds thereof. Counsel for the respondents submitted that s. 16(4) merely required the first respondent to give notification of the making of the appeal to the High Commissioner.

Held by the High Court (Finlay Geoghegan J.), in refusing the relief sought, that s. 16(4) did not require the first respondent to furnish a copy of the notice of appeal to the High Commissioner. The scheme of the Act of 1996 was to oblige the Irish authorities to give the High Commissioner certain minimal information. The information provided by the first respondent to the High Commissioner constituted a discharge by it of its obligations under s. 16(4).

Cur. adv. vult.

Finlay Geoghegan J. 12th February, 2003

Preliminary

This is an application for judicial review seeking an order ofcertiorari of the purported decision of the first respondent of the 8th April, 2002, to reject the applicant's appeal against a refusal of application for...