E v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Ors (Approved) [2021] IEHC 220 (02 March 2021)

E v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Ors (Approved) [2021] IEHC 220 (02 March 2021)

The IPAT erred in law by failing to consider the possibility of prospective risk for Ms E as a single Pakistani female after finding a Convention nexus, breaching established legal principles requiring assessment of future risk and proper reasoning. The court found no legal flaw in IPAT's rejection of the advertisement, as reasons were sufficiently grounded in evidence heard.

Citation
[2021] IEHC 220
Parties
Applicant: E; First Respondent: The International Protection Appeals Tribunal; Second Respondent: The Minister for Justice and Equality; Third Respondent: The Attorney General; Fourth Respondent: Ireland
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
02 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Asylum, International Protection, Standard of Proof, Prospective Risk, Credibility Assessment, Refugee Status, Subsidiary Protection
Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Asylum International Protection Standard of Proof Prospective Risk Credibility Assessment +2 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E

Applicant

The International Protection Appeals Tribunal

First Respondent

The Minister for Justice and Equality

Second Respondent

The Attorney General

Third Respondent

Ireland

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether IPAT failed to consider prospective risk for a single Pakistani female
  2. 2 Whether IPAT provided adequate reasons for rejecting documentary evidence
  3. 3 Whether IPAT erred in assessing credibility and risk of persecution

Ratio Decidendi

The IPAT erred in law by failing to consider the possibility of prospective risk for Ms E as a single Pakistani female after finding a Convention nexus, breaching established legal principles requiring assessment of future risk and proper reasoning. The court found no legal flaw in IPAT's rejection of the advertisement, as reasons were sufficiently grounded in evidence heard.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Order of certiorari quashing IPAT's decision
  • Order remitting Ms E's appeal to IPAT for fresh determination by a newly constituted Tribunal