The High Court has refused the State permission to appeal a ruling which ordered a fresh international protection appeal for a Georgian man suffering from serious psychiatric conditions.
Mr Justice Barr delivered the decision on 24 July 2026. It followed his earlier judgment of 27 May 2026, which set aside an International Protection Appeals Tribunal decision and sent the case back for a fresh appeal hearing.
The applicant, identified as J.R., had provided a medical report from Dr Joan Elizabeth Giller. She concluded that he suffered from complex post-traumatic stress disorder, severe depression and generalised anxiety disorder, and that these conditions adversely affected his memory.
In the earlier judgment, the court found that J.R. had completed his protection questionnaire and interviews while seriously unwell and without a lawyer present. It held that deciding his appeal solely on that documentary material was unfair and that an oral hearing was required.
The respondents sought permission to take that ruling to the Court of Appeal. They argued that it introduced a new ground for requiring oral hearings and could have wider consequences for protection cases involving applicants with psychological difficulties.
Mr Justice Barr rejected that characterisation. He held that existing law already made clear that the categories of cases requiring an oral hearing were not closed and that the central requirement was whether an applicant had received a fair opportunity to present his or her case.
The judge stressed that his earlier decision did not establish an automatic right to an oral hearing whenever an applicant had a psychiatric disorder. It depended on the detailed medical evidence in this particular case.
He also rejected arguments that there was no evidence J.R. was fit for an oral hearing and that the psychiatric basis for the request had not been adequately raised before the Tribunal.
The court concluded that the case disclosed no point of law of exceptional public importance and that an appeal was not desirable in the public interest. Leave to appeal was refused.