Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in third challenge to the decision ordering the removal and exclusion of Polish national from the State, refuses judicial review on the grounds that there has been no fundamental change of circumstances on the facts, and the order of a court in a criminal case does not constrain the Minister in exercising his powers to remove a non-Irish national; and the court refuses to refer issues to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Judicial review – asylum and immigration - third set of judicial review proceedings seeking to challenge Polish national’s removal and exclusion from the State - committed criminal offences during his period of residence in the State - subject of removal and exclusion orders – free movement of persons – inadequate reasons – proceedings adjourned to allow further reasoning – reasons provided – proceedings adjourned to challenge adequacy of the reasons - Minister issued a purported review decision - discontinued the first set of judicial review proceedings – second judicial review proceedings successfully challenged the second decision - sought a further review by the Minister having regard to his up to date position – leave granted - application for amendment - not be appropriate to allow such an amendment at this late stage given the nature of the point being made - alleged duty to reconsider the exclusion order - any second or subsequent review of a removal of decision is not suspensory - continuations of pre-existing matters and were well within the contemplation of the parties on the date that the first judicial review was struck out - allegation that Circuit Court order precludes removal - cannot make this point in the present proceedings because the point was there from the outset - collateral challenge to the original orders - the order of a court in a criminal case does not constrain the Minister in exercising his powers to remove a non-Irish national - alleged obligation to consider rehabilitation in a particular manner – amendment to include this argument refused in the first judicial review – legitimate expectations - whether the 2015 regulations preclude review of the applicant’s circumstances prior to his exclusion and if not whether they are invalid - review of the removal order and exclusion order is permitted and has already taken place - suggested reference to the CJEU - major points do not arise on the facts because no significant change of circumstance has actually been shown, a reference to the CJEU is neither necessary nor appropriate – Minister released from their undertaking not to remove – judicial review refused - costs awarded to the Minister.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.