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.
Family reunification legislation required that the ‘child of the sponsor’ be a biological or adopted child
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court allows appeal from High Court, and sets aside an order quashing a decision of the Minister for Justice to refuse family reunification in respect of two children from the Cameroon, where the applicant had subsidiary protection, claimed to be the father of the children and had an order of a Cameroonian court appointing him as their guardian, on the grounds that: (a) the term 'child of the sponsor' in the relevant legislation could only refer to a biological or adopted child; and (b) as the applicant had himself raised doubts as to whether he was the biological father of the children (where he was not married to the mother), it had been necessary and proportionate for the Minister to request DNA testing.
Dunne J (nem diss): Judicial review - refusal by Minister of 'family reunification' order - certiorari granted in High Court - appeal - interpretation of word 'child' in s. 56(9) of the International Protection Act 2015 - whether that definition could include a minor who is said to be the child of the applicant for family reunification but who is not a biological or adopted child of the applicant - background of applicant - applicant unmarried - children living with his sister in Cameroon - refusal to provide DNA evidence - appointment of applicant by court in Cameroon as sole legal guardian of the children - multiple applications for family reunification - whether High Court had misinterpreted the legislation - whether court had failed to have regard to legislative context or history - whether 'child' could encompass a child of a sponsor - whether Minister entitled to insist on DNA test - role of EU law - Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 - submissions made by UN High Commission for Refugees - 'broad interpretation to the question of family life' - how to establish whether a child is the 'child of the sponsor' - whether request for DNA testing was necessary or appropriate - doubts raised by applicant as to whether he was the father of the children.
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.
