C v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & anor [2018] IEHC 755 (21 December 2018)

C v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & anor [2018] IEHC 755 (21 December 2018)

The Tribunal was entitled to reach different conclusions on the credibility of the applicant and the related applicant based on different evidence presented in each case. There was no obligation to explain an alleged departure from the previous decision, and no legal flaw or error on the face of the record was established.

Citation
[2018] IEHC 755
Parties
Applicant: C; Respondent: The International Protection Appeals Tribunal; Respondent: The Minister for Justice and Equality
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Subsidiary Protection, Credibility Assessment, Consistency of Decisions, Judicial Review of Tribunal Decisions
Administrative Law Immigration Law Subsidiary Protection Credibility Assessment Consistency of Decisions Judicial Review of Tribunal Decisions

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C

Applicant

The International Protection Appeals Tribunal

Respondent

The Minister for Justice and Equality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the International Protection Appeals Tribunal erred in its assessment of the applicant's credibility regarding his claimed sexuality
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal was obliged to explain an alleged departure from a previous decision involving a related applicant
  3. 3 Whether there was an error on the face of the record regarding affirmation of recommendations under the Refugee Act 1996 and International Protection Act 2015

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to reach different conclusions on the credibility of the applicant and the related applicant based on different evidence presented in each case. There was no obligation to explain an alleged departure from the previous decision, and no legal flaw or error on the face of the record was established.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • All reliefs sought by the applicant are refused