The High Court has refused an Algerian man permission to challenge a decision preventing him from making a second international protection application in Ireland.
Y.D. first sought protection in November 2022, saying he feared a forced marriage arranged by family members in Algeria. His original claim was rejected after concerns were raised about its credibility, including his lack of detail, continued contact with family and the fact that he had lived in the UK for about ten years without seeking asylum.
He did not appeal the original refusal in time. Protection was later formally refused and a deportation order issued in November 2025.
In January 2026, Y.D. applied for consent to make a subsequent protection application. He relied on alleged new threats from uncles in Algeria, including claims that he would be killed if he did not return and marry a cousin. Supporting material included a sworn statement from his brother and a letter from an Algerian lawyer.
The International Protection Office refused consent. The International Protection Appeals Tribunal upheld that decision on 5 March 2026.
Under section 22 of the International Protection Act 2015, a second application is only permitted where genuinely new material makes it significantly more likely that the person will qualify for protection.
Y.D. argued that the Tribunal had wrongly assessed his new evidence through the lens of the earlier adverse credibility findings.
Ms Justice Siobhán Phelan rejected that argument. She held that previous credibility findings remain highly relevant when deciding whether new evidence meaningfully improves a protection claim. The Tribunal was entitled to consider the probative value of the brother’s statement and lawyer’s letter rather than accepting their contents at face value.
The judge found that the Tribunal had correctly applied the statutory test and had carefully considered the new material. She concluded that Y.D.’s proposed challenge was tenuous and did not meet the higher threshold required for leave in immigration judicial review proceedings.
Leave to bring the challenge was therefore refused.