190. Deputy Seamus Healy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality in view of the recent remarks by Ms Justice Maureen Harding Clark in her recent written explanation of a High Court judicial review, which quashed a decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and which included the comment: "Sometimes the Court is called upon to review a decision which is so unfair and irrational and contains so many errors that judicial review seems an inadequate remedy to redress the wrong perpetrated on an applicant. This is such a case."; the support of Amnesty International for the applicant; the accountability there is for members of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal; the means, if any, that exist for the censure or removal of RAT members where blatant abuse of process take place; in view of the defiance by a second RAT member of the High Court judicial review in this case in a second hearing and the decision of the chair of the RAT to hold a third hearing, if she intends to make any inquiry into such an inexplicable and potentially costly waste of time and legal expense, not to mention the distress caused to the applicant in question; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21943/14]

Summary

190. Deputy Seamus Healy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality in view of the recent remarks by Ms Justice Maureen Harding Clark in her recent written explanation of a High Court judicial review, which quashed a decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and which included the comment: "Sometimes the Court is called upon to review a decision which is so unfair and irrational and contains so many errors that judicial review seems an inadequate remedy to redress the wrong perpetrated on an applicant. This is such a case."; the support of Amnesty International for the applicant; the accountability there is for members of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal; the means, if any, that exist for the censure or removal of RAT members where blatant abuse of process take place; in view of the defiance by a second RAT member of the High Court judicial review in this case in a second hearing and the decision of the chair of the RAT to hold a third hearing, if she intends to make any inquiry into such an inexplicable and potentially costly waste of time and legal expense, not to mention the distress caused to the applicant in question; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21943/14]

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

1 official file

• Refugee Appeals Tribunal Decisions

  xml · EN · 15 May 2014

  ViewDownloadOpen at official source

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.