Family failed to establish that refusing the father a visa would compel them to leave the State and/or EU

Asylum and immigration – judicial review – Court of Appeal – High Court had refused judicial review of the decision of the Minister for Justice and Equality refusing to grant father a visa – background facts and proceedings – grounds of appeal - law on immigration and the rights of families – application of law to the case - alleged failure on the part of the Minister and the trial judge to consider, properly, the application of the Zambrano principles and of EU law pursuant to Article 20 TFEU – whether Zambrano applies – trial judge’s conclusion on the Zambrano issue was correct as a matter of law – failed to establish that the mother and her children would be forced to leave the State or the territory of the European Union because of a visa refusal – no special circumstances in this case as required - Minister was entitled to consider the potential cost to public funds - failed to demonstrate how the Charter applies in their case - a decision upholding the best interests of the child will not always prevail in every case - Having regard to the father’s potential employment prospects and to the mother’s failure to meet the minimum financial
conditions required of sponsors, the Minister’s decision was reasonable and proportionate – no irrationality - whether the refusal decision of the Minister gives rise to or creates a situation which would force the minor appellants to leave the territory of the European Union – has always lived as a single parent with her children – remote possibility of the family being forced to leave State and EU – no compulsion on them to leave - failed to demonstrate any appreciable risk that the minor appellants would be forced to leave the State or the territory of the EU on the basis of the Minister’s refusal of residence to their father – Zambrano not engaged – whether Zambrano has been extended – family did receive an individual assessment of the type specified by EU caselaw – best interests of the children - requirement of ‘Dependence’ – no relationship of dependence that would give rise to their being compelled to accompany him as he leaves the State – not the primary carer – failed to identify source of compulsion to leave the EU – entitled to come to the view that the children were not dependent – whether there exists a ‘genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat’ affecting one of the fundamental interests of society – in light of his offending history the decision maker was entitled to consider that the father continues to constitute an ongoing or ‘present’ threat - no question of any derived right of residence having been established - no derived right of residence arises in this case – whether less restrictive measures were considered – all relevant matters considered – individual and proportionate assessment carried out – whether judicial review was an effective remedy - law on judicial review as an effective remedy - no authority has been opened to this Court to support the contention that that the established jurisprudence on judicial review as an effective remedy does not apply – judicial review is an effective remedy - Charter has no application – appeal dismissed –