Y. (D.) v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform & Ors [2003] IESC 61 (1 December 2003)

Y. (D.) v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform & Ors [2003] IESC 61 (1 December 2003)

The Supreme Court held that Article 10(1)(e) of the Dublin Convention had not been implemented in Irish law so as to empower the Commissioner or Appeals Tribunal to terminate the examination of the applicant's asylum application on the basis that Germany was responsible, where Germany had already rejected the application. In the absence of a statutory provision authorising such a transfer or cessation, the Commissioner was obliged to determine the application on its merits. The applicant was therefore entitled to certiorari of the decisions purporting to transfer his application to Germany.

Citation
[2003] IESC 61
Parties
Applicant/respondent: D. Y.; Respondent/appellant: Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Respondent/appellant: Refugee Applications Commissioner; Respondent/appellant: James Nicholson, Member of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
01 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (judicial Review) / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed
Legal Topics
Asylum Procedures, Implementation of EU Conventions, Jurisdiction of Administrative Bodies, Judicial Review, Interpretation of Statutory Instruments
Immigration Law Administrative Law European Union Law Asylum Procedures Implementation of EU Conventions Jurisdiction of Administrative Bodies Judicial Review Interpretation of Statutory Instruments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D. Y.

Applicant/respondent

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Respondent/appellant

Refugee Applications Commissioner

Respondent/appellant

James Nicholson, Member of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (judicial Review) / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 10(1)(e) of the Dublin Convention has been incorporated into Irish law
  2. 2 Whether the Irish authorities had jurisdiction to request Germany to take back the applicant under Article 10(1)(e)
  3. 3 Whether the Refugee Applications Commissioner could terminate examination of the asylum application on the basis that Germany was responsible

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that Article 10(1)(e) of the Dublin Convention had not been implemented in Irish law so as to empower the Commissioner or Appeals Tribunal to terminate the examination of the applicant's asylum application on the basis that Germany was responsible, where Germany had already rejected the application. In the absence of a statutory provision authorising such a transfer or cessation, the Commissioner was obliged to determine the application on its merits. The applicant was therefore entitled to certiorari of the decisions purporting to transfer his application to Germany.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed

Orders

  • Order of certiorari quashing the decisions of the Commissioner and Appeals Tribunal
  • Remittal of the applicant's appeal to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal for determination in accordance with law