The Supreme Court held that becoming an Irish citizen did not, by itself, deprive two former refugees of the right to apply for family reunification under the Refugee Act 1996. Justice John MacMenamin proposed allowing their appeals and setting aside the High Court and Court of Appeal judgments. The judgment proposed hearing counsel on the precise form of the orders.
The appeals concerned M.A.M., a refugee from Somalia, and K.N., a refugee from Uzbekistan. Both had received declarations under section 17 of the 1996 Act, later became Irish citizens and sought to bring additional family members to Ireland. The Minister refused their applications on the basis that citizenship meant they no longer qualified under the Act. The Supreme Court’s decision addressed whether they remained eligible to apply under the 1996 Act; it did not decide that their family members must be admitted.
M.A.M. had received permission in 2012 to bring her mother, children and other children under her care to Ireland. After losing contact with her husband, she re-established contact in 2016 and applied to reunite with him in 2017. The Minister initially refused the application under the 12-month limit in the International Protection Act 2015. That decision was withdrawn after the Minister accepted the 2015 Act could not be applied retrospectively. A later refusal relied on her having become an Irish citizen.
K.N. received permission in 2012 to reunite with two younger daughters. In 2016 she applied for her eldest daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren. The Minister accepted the applications for the daughter and grandchildren but found the son-in-law was not an eligible family member under section 18(4). The remaining applications were later refused because K.N. had become an Irish citizen.
The High Court rejected both challenges in 2018, and the Court of Appeal upheld that result on the main issue. The Court of Appeal separately held that a 2017 decision in M.A.M.’s case could not rely retrospectively on section 47(9) of the 2015 Act; the Minister did not appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court.
Justice MacMenamin concluded that the 1996 Act made a section 17 declaration the key to eligibility for section 18 family reunification. He said the Act did not require an applicant to remain a refugee under the separate definition in section 2 after receiving that declaration. The judgment interpreted the 1996 Act and expressly said it made no determination about the corresponding questions under the 2015 Act.