The High Court has dismissed an anonymised applicant’s judicial review challenging the refusal of a family reunification application and the legislation setting a time limit for such applications.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Richard Humphreys on 29 October 2019, concerned an applicant identified as I.I. (Nigeria). She had been granted refugee status in September 2014. The Child and Family Agency (CFA), which was in a position to act on her behalf while she was in care, did not apply for family reunification until July 2018, when she was 17.
The Department of Justice and Equality refused the application on 3 September 2018 because it had not been made within 12 months of the commencement of the International Protection Act 2015. The applicant sought to have that refusal quashed and challenged the Act under the Constitution, European Union law and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The judge first found that the applicant had not provided admissible evidence showing that her mother or other relatives could not be contacted within the applicable period. He also said the CFA could have applied within the statutory period while efforts to contact relatives were ongoing. On that basis, he found the challenge to the legislation failed at the outset.
The court also rejected the argument that the applicant retained an unlimited right to apply under the repealed Refugee Act 1996. The judge held that the right to take advantage of the earlier law ended when it was repealed and was not a vested right preserved by the Interpretation Act 2005.
Addressing the alternative arguments, the judge said the applicant could seek family reunification through a non-statutory policy process or apply for visas for family members. She had not applied through those routes. He concluded that the court should not consider striking down legislation where a separate procedure could potentially achieve the requested family reunification.
The judgment also rejected the constitutional, EU law and ECHR grounds. Among its conclusions, the court found no constitutional entitlement to family reunification, said the EU Charter was not engaged in this decision, and held that the ECHR argument had not been made out given the available alternatives and the unexhausted remedies.
The order was that the application be dismissed. The court did not grant the requested relief. The judgment does not determine the outcome of any future application through the alternative routes it identified.