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.
Credibility concerns and inconsistencies in account of applicant for international protection
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court refuses judicial review of a decision refusing international protection to an applicant from Botswana, where significant inconsistencies had been found in her account. The applicant claimed domestic abuse and threats to her life as reasons for seeking asylum. However, the Tribunal highlighted discrepancies in her narrative, such as the failure to report her partner's alleged violence and the improbability of her frequent travel to South Africa against the partner's wishes. The court also dismissed the relevance of additional documentation submitted late, which did not materially support the applicant's claim.
international protection, asylum seeker, credibility assessment, domestic abuse, subsidiary protection status, Tribunal decision, inconsistencies in testimony, fair procedures, Section 28 of the International Protection Act 2015, economic refugee, autism diagnosis, financial abuse, judicial review, balance of probabilities, High Court of Ireland.
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.
