Judgment: 2016-10-14 · Court archive

High Court orders visa decision within six weeks after finding excessive delay

The court found an open-ended delay breached EU free-movement rules, but did not direct the Minister to grant the visa. It refused the applicants’ claim for damages.

High Court · [2016] IEHC 600

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Minister for Justice and Equality (Respondent)
What

The court found an open-ended delay breached EU free-movement rules, but did not direct the Minister to grant the visa. It refused the applicants’ claim for damages.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Ireland
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court has ordered the Minister for Justice and Equality to decide a Pakistani woman’s Irish visa application within six weeks, finding that an open-ended delay breached EU free-movement rules. The court did not order that the visa be granted and refused the applicants’ claim for damages.

The High Court has ordered the Minister for Justice and Equality to decide a Pakistani woman’s Irish visa application within six weeks, finding that an open-ended delay breached EU free-movement rules. The court did not order that the visa be granted and refused the applicants’ claim for damages.

The judicial review concerned an application made by the second applicant, the spouse of a British and EU citizen, to accompany him to Ireland. The Minister had received the application in July 2015. By July 2016, its examination had not begun, and no timeframe for a decision had been given. The applicants sought an order compelling a decision, along with declaratory relief and damages.

The Minister argued that the applicants had not yet moved to Ireland and were therefore outside the scope of the EU rules. The Minister also raised general concerns about possible abuse of free-movement rights, fraud and pressure on visa-processing resources, against a backdrop of a sharp rise in applications. The judgment records that the Minister had made no finding of abuse or fraud against these applicants and had not processed the application.

The court rejected the argument that the British applicant had to establish residence in Ireland before his spouse could invoke the rules on entry visas. It held that the rules allow an EU citizen and a qualifying family member who needs a visa to travel to the host state together. Their stated longer-term aim of moving from Ireland to the UK did not, by itself, prevent them from invoking those entry rights.

The judge accepted that the increase in applications created logistical difficulties and that authorities could investigate possible abuse in individual cases. But the second applicant’s file had not been examined, and the Minister had identified no applicant-specific issue that had delayed it. The court held that general concerns and resource constraints did not justify leaving the decision without a timeframe. It also found that the period before examination began could not be excluded when assessing whether the application was handled “as soon as possible”.

The order requires the Minister to take a decision within six weeks of the order being perfected. It leaves the outcome of the visa application to the Minister, who may carry out checks consistent with the Directive. The court did not decide whether the applicants would qualify for longer-term residence rights in Ireland or any derived right to reside in the UK. It refused damages because the applicants had made a bare claim without evidence of harm or loss.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review