Tao & ors v The Minister for Justice and Equality & ors (Approved) [2020] IEHC 648 (08 December 2020)

Tao & ors v The Minister for Justice and Equality & ors (Approved) [2020] IEHC 648 (08 December 2020)

The Dublin III Regulation remains operative in the United Kingdom until the end of the transition period, and the mere notification of withdrawal does not suspend its application. The Internal Market Bill is not law and does not create systemic flaws in the UK's asylum system. There is no breach of fair procedures or effective remedies as the Article 17 application will be determined within a reasonable timeframe. Reliefs sought are refused.

Citation
[2020] IEHC 648
Parties
First Applicant: Tao; Second, Third, Fourth Applicants: Jo, Bo, Go and Po (minors suing by their mother and next friend, Tao); First Respondent: The Minister for Justice and Equality; Second Respondent: Ireland and the Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
08 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Reliefs
Outcome
Reliefs refused
Legal Topics
Dublin III Regulation, International Protection, Transfer of Asylum Seekers, Article 17 Discretion, Brexit Implications, Fair Procedures
Immigration Law European Union Law Administrative Law Dublin III Regulation International Protection Transfer of Asylum Seekers Article 17 Discretion Brexit Implications +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tao

First Applicant

Jo, Bo, Go and Po (minors suing by their mother and next friend, Tao)

Second, Third, Fourth Applicants

The Minister for Justice and Equality

First Respondent

Ireland and the Attorney General

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cessation of EU law in the UK deprives transfer decisions under the Dublin III Regulation of lawfulness
  2. 2 Whether failure to make a timely Article 17 decision breaches fair procedures and effective remedies
  3. 3 Whether the Internal Market Bill or lack of published Article 17 criteria creates systemic flaws or breaches EU law

Ratio Decidendi

The Dublin III Regulation remains operative in the United Kingdom until the end of the transition period, and the mere notification of withdrawal does not suspend its application. The Internal Market Bill is not law and does not create systemic flaws in the UK's asylum system. There is no breach of fair procedures or effective remedies as the Article 17 application will be determined within a reasonable timeframe. Reliefs sought are refused.

Court Disposition

Reliefs refused