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.
Decision to refuse travel visa to Indian citizen quashed
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court grants order quashing an appeal decision of the Minister for Business, Enterprise and Employment to refuse a travel visa on the grounds that, (a) the appeal decision failed to identify sufficient reasons for the decision and a basis for same; (b) the appeal decision failed to rationalise the findings that the applicant would not observe the conditions of his visa; (c) the appeal decision failed to give proper consideration to documents submitted; (d) the appeal decision failed to rationalise the claimed inability to take account of the applicant’s work reference; (e) the appeal decision unreasonably criticised the applicant for not submitting documentation that was not identified to him; (f) the appeal decision claimed inconsistencies in the information furnished by the applicant.
Immigration law – Indian citizen – application for work permit in 2020 – application for long stay visa in July 2020 – application refused in September 2020 – appeal refused in October 2020 – application to High Court seeking order quashing the appeal decision – legal principles - whether the Minister failed to take relevant factors into account - whether the Minister’s decision was irrational and/or unreasonable – whether the Minister failed in his duty to give reasons for the decision – whether the Minister was entitled to supplement the reasons for the decision by affidavit – unreasonable to dismiss work reference – failure to set out sufficient basis for inconsistencies alleged – failure to provide reasons for finding that visa conditions would not be observed – Court not satisfied that decision maker had sufficient basis for finding that applicant had not submitted sufficient evidence- failure to identify missing documentation - reasons given by appeal officer were devoid of detail.
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.
