Tag Archives: rat


‘sup?

This morning.

Pearse Street, Dublin 2

Protesters at the site of Trinity College Dublin’s new Oisin House student accommodation block.

The main contractor on the publicly-funded project is Bennett Construction, but mechanical works are being carried out by a sub-contractor, GMG Mechanical.

Unite the Trade Union claim GMG Mechanical are paying workers less than the minimum rates stipulated in the Sectoral Employment Order governing mechanical workers.

Hence the rodent.

Leah Farrell/RollingNews

CgY_hPEXEAAOlG5

Homeowners have been advised to watch their backsides during floods after a man in the Midleton area was bitten by a rat while sitting on the toilet.

…Yesterday, Councillor Noel Collins reported the incident to Cork County Council during a Southern Area Meeting, after asking them to investigate the possibility of flushing rat poison through the sewer system.

Cllr Collins added: “I would advise homeowners to keep their toilet seats down when not in use, and to watch their posteriors.”

Jay.

Sus.

*Clench*

Mind your bum… after rat bite on loo (Evening Echo, David Linnane)

9035657190356574

‘sup?

A picket organised by the trade union Unite on the  JJ Rhatigan site, Kishoge Community College, Lucan, in a row with the construction company over pay and conditions.

Mark writes:

” The union claims that some members working on the JJ Rhatigan site are earning less than the minimum wage. Unite say the workers on Rhatigan’s Kishoge site have been forced into self-employment, with some earning less then €5 per hour. Unite also say that JJ Rhatigan is the main contractor on a range of school building projects. The Department of Education has a resposibility to ensure that contractors comply with the spirit as well as the letter of Ireland’s employment laws….”

Anyone?

(Mark Stedman/Photocall Ireland)

Colm(President Higgins appointing Colm MacEochaidh as Judge of the High Court last year)

You may recall the Iranian asylum seeker whose gayness was questioned by a member of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Another Iranian man, who came to Ireland on December 19, 2009, applied for refugee protection out of fear he would be persecuted due to his political opinions and email campaigning.

He told the Irish authorities he was arrested in June 2009 at a ‘Green Movement’ demonstration and that he was tortured for 12 days. He said he was almost arrested on a second occasion, at another political demonstration, but that he escaped.

His application was turned down in July 2012, with the Refugee Applications Commissioner claiming his application lacked credibility. This decision was later upheld by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

In upholding the decision to reject the Iranian man’s application, a Tribunal member wrote how copies of emails that were given to the Tribunal didn’t bolster the man’s claims. The Tribunal member also wrote about short video clips which, the Tribunal member claimed, actually contradicted the man’s evidence in his application.

The Tribunal member wrote:

“They [the copy emails] do not bolster his claim in any material sense. The Tribunal is fortified in this view by viewing the short video clips (recorded on a phone) of his purported attendance at various demonstrations in Iran provided by the appellant in support of his claim. Again, it is difficult to ascertain by viewing them whether the appellant was even present or whether they were obtained elsewhere (to note in this regard is that the appellant stated that they were stored on a removable flash memory card rather than on the RAM of the phone itself). However, even if one were to untainted by the visible presence of police or army officers.

Indeed, the participants themselves appeared fairly relaxed and unconcerned about the presence of even undercover agents, which seems incongruous with the earlier contention made by the appellant that he and other participants had been acutely aware of the dangers of undercover agents and the resultant necessity to conduct all their activities furtively.

But.

The Iranian man never submitted any such video clips as part of his application.

In reviewing the case, Judge Colm Mac Eochaidh found:

“The pleading and averment about the video clip are not met by the respondent with evidence to the contrary. The statement of opposition is in the barest of terms, applicant did not tender a video clip in evidence to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. No explanation has been offered by Counsel for the Tribunal why the decision maker said that a video clip had been submitted by the applicant. I do not need to speculate on how this happened. The respondents’ silence speaks for itself. I have no doubt but that the complaint made in respect of this matter by the applicant must be upheld.”

Counsel for the Tribunal urges me to allow the decision to stand by excising the passage quoted above dealing with the video clip. This is an invitation I refuse. Numerous decisions of the High Court warn against deconstructing credibility findings in decisions of the RAT. As Cooke J. notes in I.R. v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2009] IEHC 353 “When subjected to judicial review, a decision on credibility must be read as a whole and the Court should be wary of attempts to deconstruct an overall conclusion by subjecting its individual parts to isolated examination in disregard of the cumulative impression made upon the decision-maker. ………” That cuts both ways and applies to respondents too.

In this case, I cannot overlook the stark fact that the Tribunal Member considered evidence which he mistakenly believed the applicant had submitted. Neither can I disregard the fact that the Tribunal Member analysed the content of that material and concluded that it contradicted claims made by the applicant. Though it is not possible to say to what extent this contributed to the rejection of credibility, its negative effect cannot have been small. However one might categorise or describe what happened, my view is that the episode infuses the decision with illegality and it must therefore be set aside.

Judge Mac Eochaidh has granted the man leave to seek judicial review and ordered the man’s case to be heard again but by a different Tribunal member.

Read Justice Mac Eochaidh’s decision in full here.

Previously: Rescuing The Gay Refugee

Pic: President.ie

Thanks Mark Malone