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 |
The High Court has upheld the decision to transfer an asylum seeker to France, rejecting claims that the transfer was unlawful due to alleged non-compliance with health data exchange requirements under the Dublin III Regulation. The court found no exceptional circumstances to warrant a departure from the presumption that the transfer complied with EU and human rights law. The court also confirmed that the Minister for Justice's discretionary decision, signed by an official on her behalf, was valid under the Carltona principle, and that the applicant's health data had been appropriately communicated to French authorities.
Asylum seeker, Dublin III Regulation, transfer to France, health data exchange, Article 31, Article 32, Article 17(1) discretion, Carltona principle, judicial review, High Court, Minister for Justice, International Protection Office (IPO), International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT), mental health issues, PTSD, suicidal ideation, Common Health Certificate, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), right to private life, medical care, treatment, procedural compliance.
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.