O. & Anor -v- MJELR & Ors [2011] IEHC 175 (04 May 2011)

O. & Anor -v- MJELR & Ors [2011] IEHC 175 (04 May 2011)

The preparatory work by officials prior to the determination of a subsidiary protection application does not constitute 'consideration' by the Minister under Regulation 4(5); the Carltona Doctrine does not extend to such preparatory acts; the issue raised does not amount to a point of law of exceptional public importance nor is it desirable in the public interest that an appeal be taken.

Citation
[2011] IEHC 175
Parties
Applicants: O. O. and B. O. (A Minor suing by his mother and next friend O. O.); Respondents: The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Attorney General and Ireland
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
04 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court After Refusal of Leave to Seek Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Procedure, Subsidiary Protection, Deportation, Statutory Interpretation, Carltona Doctrine
Administrative Law Immigration Law Judicial Review Procedure Subsidiary Protection Deportation Statutory Interpretation Carltona Doctrine

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

O. O. and B. O. (A Minor suing by his mother and next friend O. O.)

Applicants

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Attorney General and Ireland

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court After Refusal of Leave to Seek Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Regulation 4(5) of the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations 2006 precludes any consideration by the Minister or officials of deportation matters before determination of a subsidiary protection application
  2. 2 Whether preparatory work by officials constitutes 'consideration' by the Minister under Regulation 4(5)
  3. 3 Whether the Carltona Doctrine applies to preparatory administrative work in this context

Ratio Decidendi

The preparatory work by officials prior to the determination of a subsidiary protection application does not constitute 'consideration' by the Minister under Regulation 4(5); the Carltona Doctrine does not extend to such preparatory acts; the issue raised does not amount to a point of law of exceptional public importance nor is it desirable in the public interest that an appeal be taken.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused