The High Court has dismissed a judicial review challenge by an Albanian man who argued that the International Protection Appeals Tribunal acted unfairly by relying on a UK Home Office country report without notifying him in advance.
Mr Justice Mark Heslin ruled on 19 November that the Tribunal was entitled to consider the publicly available report when rejecting the man's appeal against a recommendation that he receive neither refugee nor subsidiary protection status.
The applicant, identified only as K, applied for international protection in Ireland in July 2022. He said he feared persecution in Albania because he is gay and alleged that his father had beaten and detained him after discovering his relationship with another man.
The International Protection Office rejected his application. On appeal, the Tribunal accepted that he is homosexual but did not accept his account that he had been harmed in Albania because of his sexual orientation. It dismissed his appeal in June 2024.
K challenged that decision on the basis that the Tribunal had considered a UK Home Office note on sexual orientation and gender identity in Albania, updated in March 2024, without first giving him or his solicitors an opportunity to comment on it.
Mr Justice Heslin found that the report was mainstream, publicly accessible country-of-origin information and was materially consistent with US Department of State material already relied upon in the case. The applicant had not identified any specific error in the UK report or any particular submission he would have made had it been disclosed earlier.
The judge also rejected an argument based on section 46(8) of the International Protection Act 2015, noting recent Court of Appeal authority that the provision does not require advance disclosure for the purpose of making submissions.
An EU-law argument raised during the hearing was outside the pleaded grounds and, in any event, the judge said no breach of EU rights had been established.
The judicial review application was dismissed. The judge's preliminary view was that the respondents should receive their costs, with final orders to be considered on 5 December 2025.