AAA & anor -v- Minister for Justice & ors [2017] IESC 80 (21 December 2017)

AAA & anor -v- Minister for Justice & ors [2017] IESC 80 (21 December 2017)

The applicants failed to establish any credible evidence of risk of serious harm or persecution in Nigeria. The process provided sufficient opportunity to be heard, including oral hearings at earlier stages. Judicial review constitutes an effective remedy under Irish and EU law, and there is no requirement for a further oral hearing or a full appeal on the merits. The Minister's decision was neither unreasonable nor disproportionate. The appeal is dismissed and the High Court judgment affirmed.

Citation
[2017] IESC 80
Parties
Applicant/appellant: AAA; Applicant/appellant: JAA (an infant suing by his mother and next friend AAA); Applicant/appellant: EAA (an infant suing by her mother and next friend AAA); Applicant/appellant: SAA (an infant suing by his mother and next friend AAA); Respondent: Minister for Justice; Respondent: Ireland; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal (judicial Review Immigration/refugee) / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Subsidiary Protection, Judicial Review, Effective Remedy, Right to Be Heard, Proportionality, Deportation, Non Refoulement, Credibility Assessment
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law EU Law Subsidiary Protection Judicial Review Effective Remedy Right to Be Heard +4 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 8 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AAA

Applicant/appellant

JAA (an infant suing by his mother and next friend AAA)

Applicant/appellant

EAA (an infant suing by her mother and next friend AAA)

Applicant/appellant

SAA (an infant suing by his mother and next friend AAA)

Applicant/appellant

Minister for Justice

Respondent

Ireland

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (judicial Review Immigration/refugee) / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of subsidiary protection and deportation orders breached the applicants' rights to an effective remedy and to be heard under Irish and EU law
  2. 2 Whether an oral hearing was required for the subsidiary protection application
  3. 3 Whether the Minister's decision was unreasonable or disproportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to establish any credible evidence of risk of serious harm or persecution in Nigeria. The process provided sufficient opportunity to be heard, including oral hearings at earlier stages. Judicial review constitutes an effective remedy under Irish and EU law, and there is no requirement for a further oral hearing or a full appeal on the merits. The Minister's decision was neither unreasonable nor disproportionate. The appeal is dismissed and the High Court judgment affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment of Cooke J at first instance affirmed
  • No further relief granted to applicants