S.J. -v- Refugee Applications Commissioner & ors [2014] IEHC 108 (07 March 2014)

S.J. -v- Refugee Applications Commissioner & ors [2014] IEHC 108 (07 March 2014)

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the inordinate and inexcusable delay in seeking to amend the statement of grounds. The proposed amendment would significantly enlarge the applicant's case and constitute an entirely new cause of action. Allowing the amendment at this late stage would be unfair to the respondent and contrary to the interests of justice.

Citation
[2014] IEHC 108
Parties
Applicant: S. J.; Respondent: Refugee Applications Commissioner; Respondent: Refugee Appeals Tribunal; Respondent: Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Ireland; Notice Party: Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
07 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Amendment of Statement of Grounds and Extension of Time
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Subsidiary Protection, Judicial Review, Amendment of Grounds, Time Limits, Effective Remedy, Procedural Fairness
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Subsidiary Protection Judicial Review Amendment of Grounds Time Limits Effective Remedy +1 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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. J.

Applicant

Refugee Applications Commissioner

Respondent

Refugee Appeals Tribunal

Respondent

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Ireland

Respondent

Human Rights Commission

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Amendment of Statement of Grounds and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be permitted to amend the statement of grounds to include a challenge based on recent jurisprudence (M.M. v. Minister for Justice)
  2. 2 Whether there is good and sufficient reason to extend time for amendment
  3. 3 Whether the delay in seeking amendment is excusable

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the inordinate and inexcusable delay in seeking to amend the statement of grounds. The proposed amendment would significantly enlarge the applicant's case and constitute an entirely new cause of action. Allowing the amendment at this late stage would be unfair to the respondent and contrary to the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Refusal to extend time for bringing the application
  • Refusal to permit amendment of grounds