The High Court has quashed a decision refusing an anonymised applicant’s naturalisation application after finding that the Minister for Justice considered the convictions and pending charge of her adult sons. The court ordered the application to be reconsidered and awarded the applicant her costs.
In a judgment delivered on 30 January 2009, Mr Justice John Edwards said the applicant, a Chinese national who arrived in Ireland as a programme refugee in 2000, met the statutory requirements for naturalisation and was of good character. The Minister had discretion over whether to grant a certificate, and applicants had no entitlement to a particular outcome.
The applicant’s naturalisation application was refused in May 2007. A departmental submission recorded that she had not come to adverse attention from Gardaí, while noting that two sons had convictions and a third had no adverse Garda record. The submission was endorsed as recommended for naturalisation before a final endorsement stated “application refused”. The refusal letter referred the applicant to the submission for reasons, but the judge said it did not clearly state them.
The applicant argued that the sons’ records had influenced the refusal. Her affidavit described road traffic convictions for two sons and a pending District Court charge against one son alleging possession of knives and other articles. The judge said the charge had not yet come to trial. He accepted that at least part of the Minister’s reasoning could reasonably be inferred to relate to those matters, while noting that the full reasons were unknown.
The judge held that the sons’ records were irrelevant to their mother’s application. They were adults in their late twenties and were not under her control. The applicant could not be held responsible for their conduct or prejudiced because of her family associations, he said.
The applicant had also challenged the decision as irrational. The court made no finding on that ground because the Minister’s other reasons were unknown. It refused the declaration sought that the refusal was ultra vires, unreasonable and contrary to natural and constitutional justice, but granted certiorari quashing the refusal and mandamus remitting the application to the Minister for fresh consideration. The court awarded the applicant her costs.