The High Court has quashed a deportation order against a Bangladeshi man after finding the Minister for Justice failed to consider his employment prospects as required by immigration law.
In a judgment delivered on 21 December 2021, Ms Justice Niamh Hyland ruled that the Minister could not weigh the man’s lack of permission to work or remain in Ireland against his employment record when assessing his prospects under section 3(6)(f) of the Immigration Act 1999.
The applicant arrived in Ireland in December 2010, aged 18, and later received a residence card after marrying a Hungarian citizen. The Minister revoked the card in August 2019, finding the marriage had been one of convenience. The applicant rejected that finding but did not appeal the revocation. A deportation order followed in September 2020.
The applicant sought judicial review, arguing in part that the Minister had failed to assess his employment prospects if he were allowed to remain. The Minister’s file recorded that he was working at a petrol station, had a strong work record and good English, but added that he lacked permission to reside or work and that the Minister had no obligation to grant permission to facilitate employment.
The judge said the Minister had correctly identified the applicant’s employment history, including his work as a chef and his full-time job at a petrol station. But placing the lack of permission in the employment-prospects assessment, introduced with the word “however”, treated it as a counterweight to his positive work record. That approach, the judge found, effectively prevented any weight being given to his prospects and undermined the statutory factor. The employment-prospects assessment had to be made without reference to his lack of permission to work or reside.
The court rejected the applicant’s other principal challenges. It found the Minister had considered his age, length of residence, employment history and personal circumstances, and said the court could not substitute its own view of the weight given to those factors. It also held that the reasons for the deportation decision were adequate, taking account of the Supreme Court’s earlier decisions on the form of reasons used and the detailed examination of the file.
The judge declined the Minister’s request to refuse relief because of the marriage-of-convenience finding. She said the applicant was entitled to seek judicial review and there was no allegation of a lack of candour in the proceedings.
The court granted certiorari quashing the deportation order of 16 September 2020 on the employment-prospects ground. It had not yet decided whether to order remittal or make any other orders; it invited further submissions on those matters and on costs.