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 proceedings challenging the lawfulness of a Pakistani national’s detention and the decision of the Minister for Justice to order his deportation: (a) refuses to extend time to bring an application for judicial review, on the grounds that he gave false and misleading evidence of his date of knowledge of the Minister’s order; (b) refuses judicial review of the Minister for Justice’s decision to order his deportation on the grounds that the decision was lawful; (c) determines that his detention was lawful; (d) refuses leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal; and (e) refuses an injunction restraining his deportation.
Judicial review – asylum and immigration – Article 40 application – overstayed a vistor’s visa in the UK – refused asylum and agreed to be deported – arrived in this state – refused asylum – applied for subsidiary protection – contradictory evidence given – was married when his immigration status was precarious – wife left the State immediately after the marriage – granted a residence card on foot of his marriage to a EU citizen - suspected marriage of convenience – residence card reviewed – no evidence of wife’s residence at given address – refused subsidiary protection – permission to reside revoked – Minister for Justice ordered his deportation – failed to present at GNIB – working illegally in the State – arrested – application for leave to remain - Article 40 application – adverse credibility findings against his wife - Minister’s conclusion of a marriage of convenience is amply justified – adjournment application refused – application for an extension of time - good and sufficient reasons test – judicial comity - wrongfully and unlawfully failed to give proper notice to the Minister of his change of address - gave false and misleading evidence regarding the extent and date of his actual knowledge - no basis whatsoever to extend time – alleged breach of audi alteram partem – failed to serve - fundamental failure to comply with the statutory obligation to notify one’s address - lack of participation in the process - claim that the State failed to consider the deportation order and the decision to revoke permission appropriately - Minister utilised lawful considerations – whether a removal order rather than a deportation order should have been used - not entitled to a removal order as the EU law “rights” are procured by abuse and fraud and have been withdrawn – discretion to refuse judicial review - settled and valid intention to deport him within the statutory timeframe - extent to which he can challenge past processes in an Article 40 application -
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.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now