The High Court awarded costs to two applicants after their judicial review became moot when they withdrew a visa application and relocated to Sweden following a prolonged wait for a decision.
The ruling, delivered by Mr Justice Richard Humphreys on 14 December 2017, concerned costs only. The applicants had sought an order requiring the Minister for Justice and Equality to decide a visa application for the second applicant, an Indian national who was the spouse of the first applicant, a UK national.
The couple married on 28 September 2015. The first applicant came to Ireland in June 2016 and sought a visa for her spouse as part of her relocation. After seven months without a decision, they began judicial review proceedings seeking mandamus. A judge refused leave to bring the case, but the Court of Appeal later granted leave.
The applicants eventually withdrew the visa application and moved to Sweden. The judgment states that a visa was immediately granted to the second applicant there. The proceedings consequently became moot, leaving only the parties’ competing applications for costs.
The Minister argued that the case became moot because the applicants chose to withdraw the visa application. The judge rejected that characterisation, concluding that the withdrawal followed the length of time the couple had been separated while awaiting a decision. He said the proceedings had not become moot for a reason independent of them, so the default rule of making no order as to costs did not apply.
The court rejected the Minister’s application for costs and awarded costs to the applicants, including reserved costs. The costs are to be taxed if the parties cannot agree. The judge said it was appropriate for solicitors and two counsel to have been involved at all stages.