Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
29/11/2022
IE: The High Court confirmed a negative decision for lack of credibility with regard to sexual orientation for an applicant from Zimbabwe.

ECLI
Input Provided By
EUAA Courts and Tribunals Network
Other Source/Information
Type
Judgment
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
National law only (in case there is no reference to EU law/ECHR)
Reference
Ireland, High Court, RN v International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Anor, [2022] IEHC 669, 29 November 2022. Link redirects to the English summary in the EUAA Case Law Database.
Permanent link to the case
https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3108
Case history
Other information
Abstract

According to the summary provided by the EUAA Courts and Tribunals Network:


"The applicant was a Zimbabwean national who claimed that his two gay brothers were arrested by the Zimbabwean police. The applicant stated that he attended the police station on several occasions attempting to locate his brother. A few days later the applicant claimed that his mother received an arrest warrant stating that the applicant was also wanted by the police for being gay.


The Tribunal rejected the applicant’s claim on the basis of inconsistencies as to whether he knew or did not know where his brothers were detained, issues with the coherency of the warrant and the plausibility that the police would wait several days to arrest the applicant when he had been at the police station.


The Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision. The Tribunal was entitled to consider inconsistencies in the applicant’s claim in assessing his credibility. The Court also found the Tribunal’s treatment of the warrants to be correct and the plausibility findings were sound:


“In circumstances where the First Respondent, having identified concerns which might bear on the authenticity of the arrest warrants, concludes that they are not therefore reliable evidence in support of the claim but does not tie his findings as to the credibility of the applicant to this conclusion, then it seems to me that it cannot be said that a view that arrest warrants might be in some-way bogus was weighed in favour or against the applicant. Instead, it is clear that the First Respondent quite properly treats them as “unreliable” evidence. Finally, I have not been persuaded by any submission made on behalf of the applicant that there is a flaw in the Tribunal’s reasoning that there is a lack of plausibility flowing from a claim that the police waited until the 5th of August, 2019 to come to his house to arrest the applicant when he had been at the police station in previous days and could have been arrested at any time if the police wished to do so. Certiorari refused.


 


Country of Decision
Ireland
Court Name
IE: High Court
Case Number
[2022] IEHC 669
Date of Decision
29/11/2022
Country of Origin
Zimbabwe
Keywords
Assessment of Application
Credibility
Gender identity / Gender expression / Sexual Orientation / SOGIESC
Vulnerable Group
RETURN