M v The Minister for Justice & Ors, E v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Ors (Approved) (Rev1) [2024] IECA 290 (26 November 2024)

M v The Minister for Justice & Ors, E v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Ors (Approved) (Rev1) [2024] IECA 290 (26 November 2024)

Dáil debates are inadmissible as evidence for establishing legislative purpose or intent, whether for statutory interpretation or to determine if amendments cure deficiencies identified by the High Court. The exclusionary rule applies, and the evidence sought to be adduced is not admissible for the purposes advanced by the Respondents.

Citation
[2024] IECA 290
Parties
Applicant/respondent: FOM; Applicant/respondent: KE; Respondents/appellants: Minister for Justice, Ireland and the Attorney General; Respondents/appellants: International Protection Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
26 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Motion to Admit Further Evidence on Appeal
Outcome
Relief refused
Legal Topics
Safe Third Country Designation, Admissibility of Evidence, Statutory Interpretation, International Protection, Legislative Intent
Immigration Administrative Law EU Law Safe Third Country Designation Admissibility of Evidence Statutory Interpretation International Protection Legislative Intent

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FOM

Applicant/respondent

KE

Applicant/respondent

Minister for Justice, Ireland and the Attorney General

Respondents/appellants

International Protection Appeals Tribunal

Respondents/appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Motion to Admit Further Evidence on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dáil debates are admissible as evidence to establish legislative purpose or intent
  2. 2 Whether amendments to the International Protection Act 2015 render the appeals moot
  3. 3 Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to admit new evidence under Order 86A, rule 4

Ratio Decidendi

Dáil debates are inadmissible as evidence for establishing legislative purpose or intent, whether for statutory interpretation or to determine if amendments cure deficiencies identified by the High Court. The exclusionary rule applies, and the evidence sought to be adduced is not admissible for the purposes advanced by the Respondents.

Court Disposition

Relief refused

Orders

  • Motion to admit further evidence (Dáil debates) refused