The High Court has refused a Pakistani national’s application to quash the Minister for Justice’s refusal of his Irish citizenship application, finding that the Minister could take his failure to disclose earlier traffic fines into account when assessing good character.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Faherty on 6 October 2017, concerned a naturalisation application refused in September 2015. The applicant had lived in Ireland since arriving on a student visa in 2003 and had held permission to reside and work here since 2007. At the time of the refusal, he was employed by Tesco Ireland. His wife and their child lived in Pakistan.
In his 2013 application, the applicant disclosed a 2011 parking fine but did not list three traffic offences for which Limerick City Court had fined him a total of €750 in June 2010. After the Department asked about the fines, he said he had omitted them by mistake, apologised and supplied receipts showing they had been paid. He also explained that he had misunderstood whether his foreign driving licence allowed him to drive in Ireland.
The Minister refused the application on the ground that the non-disclosure meant she could not be satisfied that the applicant was of good character, a statutory condition for naturalisation. The applicant argued that the decision was unfair and unreasonable because the omission was an innocent mistake and his explanation had not been properly assessed. He also argued that the decision wrongly treated non-disclosure as an offence without considering whether it was knowing or reckless.
The court found that the refusal rested on the failure to disclose the 2010 fines, rather than on the fines themselves. It accepted that the Department’s submission to the Minister referred to the applicant’s explanation, and found no basis to conclude that it had not been considered. The applicant’s employment history and payment of the fines were also noted in the material before the Minister.
Justice Faherty held that the Minister could treat non-disclosure of information specifically requested on the application form as relevant to good character. The Minister did not have to determine whether the omission amounted to an offence under section 29A of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956. Although the departmental submission misstated the law by describing failure to disclose as an offence, that error did not make the refusal unreasonable in the circumstances.
The court also rejected the argument that the refusal effectively prevented any future application. It said the applicant had been told the reason for refusal and could reapply; the court would not speculate about the outcome of a future application or require the Minister to guide him on how to make one. The court denied the relief sought. It did not grant naturalisation or determine the result of any future application.