BNY17 v Minister for Immigration and Anor and BRU17 v Minister for Immigration and Anor and BRW17 and Ors v Minister for Immigration and Anor

The applicants, BNY17, BRU17, and BRW17 and others, sought judicial review of decisions made by the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) concerning their applications for protection visas. The adult applicants claimed a fear of harm if returned to Sri Lanka, while the child applicants claimed membership of the family group. The proceedings were heard by Judge Driver.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the IAA had based its decision in respect of the adult applicants on non-existent facts, and whether the IAA had properly considered the likely fate of the child applicants upon their return to Sri Lanka. The applicants contended that these issues constituted jurisdictional error.

Judge Driver found no jurisdictional error in the IAA's decisions. The reasoning applied was that the IAA's assessment of the adult applicants' claims was based on the evidence before it, and the court was not satisfied that the facts relied upon by the IAA were non-existent. Furthermore, the court concluded that the IAA had adequately considered the likely fate of the child applicants in its overall assessment of the protection claims. The applications for judicial review were therefore dismissed.