The High Court has quashed a deportation order against a Nigerian man after finding multiple errors in the Minister for Justice and Equality’s assessment of his family circumstances and the effects of his removal from Ireland.
Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered the judgment on 14 November 2019. The case concerned a deportation order issued by letter dated 31 May 2019 against Raphael Babatunde, who had lived in Ireland since 2013 and did not then have permission to work. The court granted certiorari and remitted the matter to the Minister for fresh consideration. It did not decide the outcome of that reconsideration.
The Minister’s decision had concluded that there was no family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights between Mr Babatunde and Mr Obembe, an Irish citizen who was a minor when the decision was made. Mr Babatunde was not married to Mr Obembe’s mother and had not adopted him. But the High Court said undisputed evidence showed they had lived together since 2014 and that Mr Babatunde had been a father figure to him. Mr Obembe had described him as “my Daddy”. The court held that the Minister placed impermissible emphasis on the lack of a formal legal relationship.
The judge also found that the Minister had not assessed the effect of deportation on Mr Obembe’s Article 8 rights or properly considered his constitutional rights. The decision failed to adequately assess the best interests of Mr Obembe and Mr Babatunde’s two younger children, the court said. It also failed to consider whether the potential lifelong separation from Mr Obembe would be proportionate.
On the Minister’s reasoning about the State’s economic well-being, the judge questioned how deportation followed logically from Mr Babatunde’s work history as a physicist in Nigeria and his work in Ireland while permitted to do so. The decision also relied on a lack of evidence that he had specialist skills in deficit, although he was making submissions on a proposed deportation order, not applying for an employment permit.
The court rejected one challenge: it found the Minister’s reasoning was sufficiently discernible and did not breach the applicants’ right of access to the courts. It upheld the challenge to the finding that the children’s mother was their primary carer, describing that conclusion as unreasonable in light of evidence that Mr Babatunde had actively helped raise them from birth.
Although Mr Obembe had reached adulthood by the time of judgment, the court said the errors meant the deportation decision could not stand. The Minister must now consider the matter anew.