Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Assault conviction in Egypt sufficient to exclude applicant from subsidiary protection in Ireland
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court refused judicial review the decision of the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT), affirming the recommendation of the International Protection Officer that the applicant, an Egyptian national, should not be granted subsidiary protection in Ireland. The IPAT had determined that the applicant's conviction for assault in Egypt, which resulted in a five-year prison sentence, constituted a 'serious crime' under the relevant legislation. Despite the applicant's claim that he would face inhuman and degrading treatment if imprisoned in Egypt, the IPAT found that the applicant's personal circumstances did not place him at a heightened risk of imprisonment in such conditions.
International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT), International Protection Act 2015, subsidiary protection, serious crime, exclusion clause, assault conviction, judicial review, High Court, Egypt, prison conditions, refugee status, credible narrative, mitigating factors, Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997, inhuman and degrading treatment, Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Qualification Directive, European Asylum Support Office (EASO), Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
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.
