LK v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & anor (Approved) [2020] IEHC 626 (04 December 2020)

LK v The International Protection Appeals Tribunal & anor (Approved) [2020] IEHC 626 (04 December 2020)

The panel member's report was not a decision but assistance to the IPO, who lawfully made the transfer decision; the Tribunal's comments on Article 17 discretion were not ultra vires or prejudicial as they have no legal effect on the Minister's future decision.

Citation
[2020] IEHC 626
Parties
Applicant: LK; First Respondent: The International Protection Appeals Tribunal; Second Respondent: The Minister for Justice and Equality
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
04 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Leave and Substantive Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
International Protection, Dublin III Regulation, Jurisdiction of Decision Makers, Delegation of Authority, Article 17 Discretion
Immigration Law Administrative Law European Union Law International Protection Dublin III Regulation Jurisdiction of Decision Makers Delegation of Authority Article 17 Discretion

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LK

Applicant

The International Protection Appeals Tribunal

First Respondent

The Minister for Justice and Equality

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Leave and Substantive Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the panel member had jurisdiction to make recommendations regarding transfer under the Dublin III Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the First Respondent's comments on Article 17 discretion were ultra vires and prejudicial

Ratio Decidendi

The panel member's report was not a decision but assistance to the IPO, who lawfully made the transfer decision; the Tribunal's comments on Article 17 discretion were not ultra vires or prejudicial as they have no legal effect on the Minister's future decision.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Relief sought in the amended Statement of Grounds is refused