Economic well-being of State outweighs right of married couple to reside together

Judicial review – asylum and immigration – substantive decision - challenge to the decision to refuse a visa to a husband so that he could join his wife in the State – wife is an Irish citizen – moved from Nigeria in 2002 – met her husband whilst on holiday – made numerous trips to see him – married in Nigeria – husband applied for a visa to join his wife – refused – review upheld the refusal - cost to public funds and resources – leave granted – argued that the Minister erred in law and acted unreasonably and irrationally and fettered her own discretion in solely applying the terms of her Policy Document in order to refuse the application – argued that the Minister acted irrationally in applying the strict and rigid policy – argued that the Minister  acted unreasonably and irrationally in failing to consider at all the wife’s current and future income and employment status in the State – argued that the decision was based upon irrelevant matters and had been arrived at without lawful regard for the constitutional, private and family life rights of the applicants – argued that the Minister erred in law and acted unreasonably and irrationally in applying a test of “exceptional circumstances” within a proportionality exercise – argued that the Minister failed to uphold their family rights pursuant to the Constitution – Minister failed to consider that the husband prepared to accept a visa that would disallow recourse to public funds – proportionality – whether the Minister solely applied the monetary requirements of the Policy Document in refusing the visa application such that she fettered her discretion – did the Minister failed to consider the fact that the wife’s financial position changed - conclusions arrived at were within the parameters of reasonableness having regard to the income threshold set out in the Policy Document and the facts presented - no basis in fact for the assertion that the Appeals Officer did not take into account the up-to-date financial position  - challenge to the decision on the “exceptional circumstances” ground not made out -  no failure to consider Constitutional rights - conclusions were the product of the balancing exercise which was required to be carried out - the economic well-being of the country was found to prevail over the applicants’ prima facie right to reside in the State as a married couple – decision proportionate – decision not irrational or unreasonable – judicial review refused.