CC v International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Anor (Approved) [2023] IEHC 636 (27 October 2023)

CC v International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Anor (Approved) [2023] IEHC 636 (27 October 2023)

The applicant was not entitled to notification from the Tribunal regarding the oral hearing or an invitation to submit further material; the legal regime and APN made it clear that appellants should not expect further communication, and the applicant had ample opportunity to submit additional material but failed to do so. No substantial grounds for judicial review were established.

Citation
[2023] IEHC 636
Parties
Applicant: CC; First Respondent: International Protection Appeals Tribunal; Second Respondent: Minister for Justice
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
27 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
International Protection, Fair Procedures, Accelerated Appeals, Oral Hearing Entitlement
Immigration Law Administrative Law International Protection Fair Procedures Accelerated Appeals Oral Hearing Entitlement

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CC

Applicant

International Protection Appeals Tribunal

First Respondent

Minister for Justice

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal breached fair procedures by failing to notify the applicant to furnish further submissions before deciding the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was not entitled to notification from the Tribunal regarding the oral hearing or an invitation to submit further material; the legal regime and APN made it clear that appellants should not expect further communication, and the applicant had ample opportunity to submit additional material but failed to do so. No substantial grounds for judicial review were established.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused