The High Court refused an injunction on 31 July 2018 that would have prevented the deportation of Teejay Abdulwahid while his judicial review proceeded. The judge said his application had been made too close to the scheduled removal for the court to hear the underlying case alongside the injunction request.
Mr Justice Richard Humphreys had granted Mr Abdulwahid leave to seek judicial review that day, subject to his solicitor undertaking to file papers on 1 August. The case was listed to return on 1 October. The judge had also struck out, with no order, an Article 40 application after Mr Abdulwahid withdrew it. The immediate question was whether to restrain deportation pending the judicial review, not whether to decide that review.
The judgment said Mr Abdulwahid was due to be removed that night. He had been arrested on 24 July under a detention order and made a third application under section 3(11) of the Immigration Act 1999 on 28 July. He came to court on 31 July, about four to five hours before the scheduled flight. The judge said an earlier application might have allowed an accelerated hearing of the merits and injunction together.
A deportation order had been made in 2010, requiring Mr Abdulwahid to leave Ireland by 7 August that year. He did not leave, and the judgment records that he later failed to attend requested presentations. Two earlier section 3(11) applications, in 2010 and 2014, had been refused. An application to remain based on parentage of an Irish-born child was unsuccessful in 2013.
In applying the injunction test, the judge gave weight to the orderly implementation of measures presumed valid, Mr Abdulwahid’s eight-year evasion of the order, and the late timing of his court application. He described the judicial review case as appearing “very weak indeed”, while noting that family rights were its strongest point. He said deportation would significantly affect Mr Abdulwahid’s family relationships, including those with his partner’s children, but said those matters should first be considered by the Minister through the section 3(11) process. If that application succeeded, he said, Mr Abdulwahid could be brought back.
The judge said the argument that HIV treatment would not be available in Nigeria was speculative and not a significant ground for an injunction. He also criticised the Irish Prison Service’s refusal to give the Garda National Immigration Bureau information about Mr Abdulwahid’s health, urging the agencies to resolve the issue urgently.
The court declined to restrain the deportation. The judge urged Mr Abdulwahid to make a comprehensive section 3(11) application promptly and the Minister to process it quickly. The judgment did not decide the judicial review or the outcome of that application.