K. (M.) v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform & Ors [2005] IEHC 308 (7 October 2005)


BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

High Court of Ireland Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> High Court of Ireland Decisions >> K. (M.) v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform & Ors [2005] IEHC 308 (7 October 2005)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2005/H308.html
Cite as: [2005] IEHC 308

[New search] [Help]


    Neutral Citation No: [2005] IEHC 308

    THE HIGH COURT
    2005 72 J.R.
    BETWEEN/
    M K
    APPLICANT
    AND
    THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM,
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND IRELAND
    RESPONDENTS
    AND
    THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
    NOTICE PARTY
    Supplemental Judgment of Mr. Justice Murphy dated 7th October, 2005.

    This is a judgment supplemental to the judgment already delivered on 15th July, 2005.

    The parties applied to the court on 26th July in relation to the issue as to whether the court had considered the supplemental affidavit of Mr. K dated 11th March, 2005. The judgment, at p. 4, refers to the affidavit (in singular) of the applicant and at p. 19, says that the affidavit of the applicant sworn on 24th January, 2005 refers to the asylum process. The judgment then refers to the applicant's solicitor seeking reports pursuant to s. 3 of the 1999 Act and s. 5 of the 1996 Act, saying that the applicant would swear a further affidavit on receipt of the requested reports made pursuant to s. 11(7) and s. 13(1) of the 1999 Act.

    The court acknowledges that the applicant did, indeed, swear a supplemental affidavit. However, that supplemental affidavit was limited to a consideration of the reports which were, in fact, given to the applicant subsequent to the solicitor's request.

    No new facts were referred to in the affidavit. It seems clear that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and, indeed, the Minister in making the deportation order, had the file which contained the said reports.

    In fact, the court had considered the supplemental affidavit dated 11th March, 2005, though did not refer to the affidavits in the plural. Moreover, it appears to the court, that the decision of the court in relation to the judicial review is not affected by that supplemental affidavit.

    For the purpose of clarity the court declares that, having considered the affidavit and the exhibits therein that the burden of proof was not discharged by the applicant and, accordingly, the court confirms the refusal of leave to apply for judicial review.

    Approved: Murphy J.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2005/H308.html