The Court of Appeal has quashed the Minister for Justice and Equality’s refusal of a naturalisation application made for Adriana Borta, a minor, after finding that the decision did not explain why her Irish associations were considered too weak.
The court allowed the appeal in part and sent the matter back to the Minister for further consideration. It did not direct that Ms Borta be granted naturalisation.
Ms Borta’s mother applied on her behalf under section 16 of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, which gives the Minister discretion to grant naturalisation in certain cases, including where an applicant has Irish associations. The Minister accepted that Ms Borta qualified as having Irish associations through her sister, an Irish citizen, but refused the application in May 2017, saying the associations were not sufficiently strong.
Ms Borta argued that once the statutory condition of Irish association was met, the Minister could not refuse naturalisation based on the strength of that same association. She also argued that the decision was inadequately reasoned. The Minister submitted that section 16’s grant of “absolute discretion” allowed consideration of the nature and strength of the associations.
The appeal court rejected Ms Borta’s argument that the Minister was barred from assessing their strength. It held that section 16 did not require naturalisation to be granted once an applicant had established Irish associations, and that considering their strength was not an irrelevant consideration or circular reasoning.
However, the court found that the reasons given did not disclose why Ms Borta’s association through her sister was insufficient. The decision noted her residence in Ireland, full-time education and Irish-citizen sister, but did not explain which factors affected the assessment. It also did not state whether the sister’s age or the timing of her birth played any role.
The court said Ms Borta was entitled to know the real basis for the refusal, including so she could understand whether a further application might succeed or challenge the decision. It concluded that the Minister had failed to give adequate reasons and quashed the refusal notified by letter dated 16 May 2017.