The High Court quashed the deportation order for a child born in Ireland after finding that the Minister for Justice had not adequately examined his position as an individual. It refused the family’s application to quash the deportation orders for the child’s mother and two older siblings.
Mr Justice Robert Eagar delivered the judgment on 4 March 2015 in a judicial review brought by C.O.O. and her three children. The family had sought to quash deportation orders made on 5 August 2011 and a declaration that deportation would breach Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The mother, a Nigerian national, came to Ireland in December 2006 to seek asylum. Her older two children arrived in September 2008 as unaccompanied minors. Her youngest child was born in Ireland in February 2007 but was not an Irish citizen. The family’s refugee and subsidiary protection applications had been unsuccessful.
The applicants argued that the Minister had failed to treat the children’s best interests as a primary consideration and had not properly considered their constitutional and human rights. Their lawyer said the youngest child’s case had been absorbed into his mother’s assessment, while the older children’s files recorded little beyond their ages and school classes.
The judge considered the Minister’s examination under section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999, including family circumstances, humanitarian considerations, representations and the common good. The file recorded the children’s circumstances and information about conditions in Nigeria. It also referred to the mother’s and youngest child’s asthma, their medical care in Ireland, the mother’s voluntary work and the children’s school attendance. The mother’s submissions included that she had no home or means of support in Nigeria and feared for her children’s safety.
For the youngest child, who was three years and seven months old when the orders were made, the judge held that the Minister could not adequately assess him merely as part of his mother’s case. He quashed the deportation decision relating to that child.
The court was not satisfied that the Minister had failed to adequately assess the older two children. It also refused to quash the deportation order against their mother. The judge said the Thirty-First Amendment, which concerned children’s rights and was then subject to legal challenge, could not affect the decision at that stage. The judgment said the Minister’s obligations would be different if the amendment became law, but it did not apply it to this case.