Supreme Court will hear appeal over State failure to accommodate asylum seekers

High Court Reporters

The Supreme Court is to hear an appeal brought by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) against a lower court’s ruling that the State had not breached the human right to dignity of international protection applicants by failing to accommodate them.

The Court of Appeal (CoA) last July upheld the State’s appeal against a High Court ruling on proceedings taken by the Commission.

The High Court found in August of last year that, in failing to provide them with accommodation, the State breached the human right to dignity of single male international protection applicants.

In a recently-published determination, a three-judge Supreme Court panel said it would grant permission to the IHREC to appeal the CoA ruling, stating that its application “clearly satisfies” the constitutional criteria for appeal.

In its ruling, the CoA accepted the commission had proven, based on testimony from 13 applicants, the men were in a situation of extreme material poverty.

It disagreed that the group’s health issues were representative of all applicants in similar positions, saying the evidence was limited to those individuals’ experiences.

The commission, the appeal court held, had not provided adequate evidence to prove the physical or mental health of unaccommodated applicants was undermined, or they were in a state of degradation incompatible with human dignity.

Summarising the IRHEC’s application seeking permission, the Supreme Court panel noted that the commission submitted its appeal raises issues of very significant public importance – specifically regarding the interpretation of Article 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Given the “very different conclusions” reached by the High Court and the CoA in the case, the IHREC said it was appropriate to allow a further appeal to the Supreme Court.

The IHREC also said the appeal should be permitted in the interests of justice, arguing that the CoA allowed the State’s appeal on a basis that was not specifically advanced in the State’s case.

The Supreme Court panel noted that the State is in agreement that the subject matter of the proceedings is of general public importance, identifying several “headline features”.

These included the potential liability of the State in circumstances where – in the words of the State – it is temporarily unable to “provide material reception conditions to a limited cohort of international protection applicants because of unprecedented circumstances”.

The State also agrees that the application and interpretation of Article 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is of importance.

An appeal is in the interests of justice, according to the State, given the potential impact of the outcome of the proceedings on future cases, and because of the differing conclusions reached by the High Court and CoA.

Allowing the appeal, the panel noted that several matters of general public importance have been identified by the parties, including issues relating to the rights charter.

The panel also said it was in the interests of justice that the appeal is permitted.