Member Login

Tribunal committed error of law in refusing grant of refugee status

By: Ian Fitzharris BL

or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments

High Court, in judicial review proceedings concerning a decision of the International Protection Appeals Tribunal affirming a recommendation of the International Protection Office that the applications be given neither a declaration of refugee status nor a subsidiary protection declaration arising from the manner in which the tribunal dealt with certain 'country of origin' information regarding the level of state protection available to the applicants if they were returned to a foreign state, quashes the decision by reason of an error of law committed by the tribunal to the effect that: it failed to ask itself the correct legal questions arising from the application in light of certain legislative provisions on the issue of whether effective state protection would exist for the applicants; and, on the materials available to the tribunal, it cold not be said that there was an effective legal system in place in the foreign state of a non-temporary nature for the detection, prosecution and punishment of xenophobic violence to which the applicants were in fear thereof.

Judicial review - international protection appeals tribunal - decision affirming recommendation of international protection office that applicants be given neither a declaration of refugee status nor a subsidiary protection declaration - tribunal's approach to application of state protection test - manner in which tribunal dealt with country of origin information - whether decision vitiated by an error of law in application of legal test as to whether or not state protection would be available to the applicants and/or that the tribunal's treatment of available country of origin information was irrational and/or inadequately reasoned - factual chronology leading to decision - tribunal's decision on xenophobic violence risks and issue of state protection - legal principles applicable to tribunal's decision to a claim that country of origin would not provide state protection - international protection legislative regime - key evidence and reasoning relied upon by tribunal - US state department report - errors in reasoning - state of affairs regarding extent of state protection - erroneous conclusion in law - test not merely one of 'effort' - requirement for an effective system of protection to be in place of a non-temporary nature - unequivocal evidence in country of origin information - tribunal failed to ask itself the correct legal questions - certiorari granted

Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *