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 two cases challenging the decisions refusing applications for family reunification with spouses, grants judicial review, on the grounds that the relevant statutory provision is unconstitutional as it provides for differences of treatment between a marriage made pre-/post application for refugee status without any apparent rationality or proportionality.
Asylum and immigration – judicial review – challenges to two decisions refusing family reunification applications – Afghani national declared a refugee – sought family reunification with his Pakistani spouse – second applicant sought family reunification with Afghani spouse – relevant statutory provisions – prematurity – argued that he cannot proceed with his statutory reunification application, he can make application under a non-statutory, discretionary reunification scheme – Constitutional right to equality - reasons advanced by the Minister - differences of treatment without any apparent rationality or proportionality - absence of any objective evidence - State’s international obligations - unconstitutional treatment of him/his marriage - Convention arguments – UK caselaw - difference in treatment was not objectively and reasonably justified – judicial review granted.
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