The High Court has lifted an interim stay on enforcement of a deportation order after finding that the applicant had failed to attend on required presentation dates and had not adequately disclosed those failures when seeking the stay.
Mr Justice Richard Humphreys ruled on 10 February 2020 in judicial review proceedings brought by Sailendra Basnet against the Minister for Justice and Equality. The court did not decide the application for leave to bring the judicial review; it adjourned that application to 17 February.
The judgment says Mr Basnet entered Ireland from Nepal in September 2013 on student permission, renewed until October 2017. He sought a further renewal in March 2018, which counsel said was believed not to have been positively refused. In July 2019, the Minister notified him of an intention to make a deportation order. After submissions opposing deportation, an order was sent in October 2019 requiring him to leave the State or present on 13 November.
The court was told he did not attend on that date, but later presented on another day with his solicitor. The judge said the precise date was unclear, though 14 November appeared to be accepted as most likely. A further presentation date was set for 14 January 2020. Mr Basnet did not attend at the required time that day. His lawyers applied to another High Court judge for a stay an hour later, without giving the State even informal notice. The stay prevented any enforcement of the deportation order until the proceedings were determined.
The judge rejected the Minister’s argument that a stay could only be granted after leave had been granted. He held that the court had inherent jurisdiction to grant one urgently before that stage. However, he found that continuing the stay was inappropriate because the applicant had not complied with his presentation obligations or adequately informed the court of the failures in the ex parte application.
The court vacated the stay. It noted that a new presentation date would be given by 11am on 12 February, requiring presentation by the end of that week under the Immigration Act 1999. The leave application was adjourned to 17 February, and the judge said any favourable consideration would take account of compliance with presentation obligations. The judgment made no final determination of the judicial review challenge.