Minister failed to provide a fresh hearing to decide on subsidiary protection

Judicial review - subsidiary protection – Irish system of international protection is bi-furcated –only in the event of a failed asylum application can an applicant apply for subsidiary protection – extent to which the Minister is obliged to give an applicant a separate opportunity to be heard in a subsidiary protection application – judgment follows a reference to the ECJ – Rwandan national of Tutsi ethnicity – claimed that he was directed to work as a military prosecutor in an effort to silence him and to prevent him from divulging information regarding the genocide – fled to Ireland - rejected on credibility grounds – applied for subsidiary protection using substantially the same grounds – whether the duty to cooperate encompassed a duty to supply the applicant with a copy of any draft decision adverse to the applicant for comment referred to the ECJ – ECJ rejected the applicant’s argument – ECJ went on to consider the right of the foreign national to be heard in the course of his subsidiary protection application – procedures directive does not apply to Member States who have not established a single procedure – the applicant must be heard in each of the two procedures – whether an oral hearing is necessary - duty of loyal co-operation between the national courts and the Court of Justice – Minister relied on the adverse credibility findings made in the asylum application – whether the Minister is obliged to reconsider the same facts – in a bi-furcated system subsidiary protection must be evaluated separately and distinctly from the determination on the asylum application – not a generalised claim therefore the Minister cannot rely on general reasons – separation of powers.