The High Court refused two minor applicants leave to seek judicial review of asylum recommendations and deportation orders, ruling that their claims had been considered through their parents’ applications. The decision was made by Mr Justice Brian McGovern on 26 June 2007.
The applicants, identified in the judgment as Z.Z., G.Z., S.Z. and N.Z., challenged the refusal of asylum and deportation orders made on 27 January 2006. They sought orders quashing those decisions and preventing deportation. The judgment describes G.Z. and S.Z. as minors suing through their father, and N.Z. as a minor suing by his father and next friend.
The family arrived in Ireland on 12 September 2002. Their parents, ethnic Serbs from Croatia, claimed they were persecuted there. Their asylum applications were refused by the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. The applicants argued that the authorities should have considered the children’s asylum claims separately from their parents’ claims.
The judge extended the time for bringing the challenge, finding good and sufficient reason for the short delay. The proceedings had been issued on 16 March 2006, after the challenge period had expired on 8 March.
On the substance, the judge noted that the children’s mother had signed a document asking for them to be included in her asylum application. He also found that the parents’ concerns about the children being bullied or discriminated against at school because of their Serbian ethnicity had been raised before both asylum bodies.
Relying on an earlier High Court decision, Nwole v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the judge agreed that a separate assessment was not required where no distinct grounds for a child’s claim had been identified. He said the mother’s request to include the children made this case clearer. The parents had not sought review of the refusals of their own asylum applications or of the deportation order.
The court refused leave to seek judicial review against both the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It did not grant the requested orders quashing the decisions or restraining deportation. The ruling was at the leave stage; the court did not conduct a full judicial review hearing.