The High Court has ruled that the direct provision system does not breach the human rights of two asylum seekers based in Galway.

However the woman and her son have won their claim that there is no justification for some of the house rules in their accommodation.

The pair are asylum seekers who have been living in state provided accommodation in Galway since mid-2011.

In this legal action, they claimed the direct provision system breaches their rights under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

They accept that direct provision is not unlawful in itself, but they argue it becomes unlawful over a lengthy period of time - in that it amounts to inhuman and degrading treatment.

They also claimed there is no statutory basis for the system and fought the weekly payments of €19.10 for an adult and €9.60 for a child

Mr Justice Colm MacEochaidh has found against them on all these major claims.

Not able to resolve the central dispute

In his 130 page judgment, he finds their complaint that direct provision breaches human rights was doomed - not because the proposition is wrong, but because they did not call witnesses to give evidence that it was harmful and they failed to cross examine the state witnesses who said it was not.

That meant he could not resolve the central dispute.

However Mr Justice MacEochaidh has found there is no justification for some of the house rules in direct provision accommodation. These include signing on daily, unannounced inpections and the 'no guests rule' in resident's rooms.

These he concludes amount to a breach of the right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the European Convention.

The case will come back to court next month to see what further steps may be taken.