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.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in judicial review challenging the decision refusing an Albanian national international protection, refuses application for an injunction restraining the Minister for Justice from refusing her a declaration of refugee and/or subsidiary protection status, on the grounds that there was no real risk of injustice to the Albanian national in allowing the Minister to operate the statutory process in a situation where the only prejudice is the purely legal one of having to challenge any adverse decision.
Asylum and immigration – judicial review – injunctions – Albanian national refused international protection – granted leave to judicially review – sought an injunction restraining Minister for Justice from refusing to give her a declaration of refugee status or subsidiary protection status – sought an undertaking – not forthcoming – moved application for an injunction – whether the Minister should be restrained from operating the statutory process - any adverse decision predicated on refusal of protection would automatically fall and the applicant does not need to do anything in that regard - all subsequent adverse decisions premised on the IPAT decision would be withdrawn – if she loses the present judicial review, she would have to cross the hurdle of those other processes anyway – prejudice - no conscious practice of holding up decision-making if an IPAT decision is challenged – amend proceedings if further adverse decision made - principle of giving effect to prima facie valid decisions - appropriate order is to refuse the interlocutory stay at the present time, but with liberty to renew the application if any relevant circumstances change –
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.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.