The High Court dismissed three grounds of a judicial review challenge to a deportation order but kept an interim bar on deportation in place until 20 May 2019, while it adjourned the applicants’ remaining claims for further submissions.
The case was brought by an Indian father, a Romanian mother and their infant son against the Minister for Justice and Equality. The father was detained at Cloverhill Prison after his arrest on 28 April 2019 under a 2016 deportation order. He had entered Ireland in 2014 and had been living here unlawfully, the judgment said.
The mother arrived in Ireland in 2015 and had opened a food outlet or takeaway with substantial financial assistance from the father’s family. The Minister had not yet investigated her account of her economic activity. Their son was born in Ireland in January 2019. The judge said the child might qualify for Irish citizenship if the mother’s account was accepted and she was found to have exercised EU treaty rights for the required period. The Minister’s counsel treated the child as Romanian for the submissions.
The father applied on 3 May 2019 to have the deportation order revoked. The family filed judicial review proceedings on 7 May, seeking to prevent removal while applications were considered. The father had signed an EU treaty rights application form on 9 May, but it had not been submitted by the time of the judgment. The court noted that such an application, and an application to revoke a deportation order, did not by themselves suspend removal.
Justice Richard Humphreys dismissed the challenge insofar as it relied on grounds 1, 2 and 5. He rejected an argument that the balance of convenience alone entitled the applicants to a final injunction, and found no general right to remain pending decisions on the applications.
He adjourned the claims under grounds 3 and 4 until 20 May, saying questions about possible disproportionality and EU law required more detailed submissions before a final decision. Those claims relied on alleged family disruption, including that the mother might have to stop working to care for the child and that the mother and child might have to move to India. These were claims advanced in the proceedings, not findings that those outcomes would occur.
The court directed the applicants to make any intended EU treaty rights or Zambrano applications, and any submissions relying on specified family rights, by 13 May. The Minister was directed to use best endeavours to decide the revocation application by 17 May. The court also ordered an interlocutory injunction preventing deportation until 20 May and directed the parties to address whether a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union was appropriate.