The High Court awarded Youcef Mansouri half his costs after finding it reasonable for him to bring judicial review proceedings over delays in deciding his Irish citizenship application. The court did not decide the merits of his challenge: the application became moot after the Minister for Justice granted him a certificate of naturalisation.
Mr Mansouri, an Algerian national who had been recognised as a refugee, applied for naturalisation in February 2008. Over the following years, his solicitors repeatedly sought a decision, an indication of when one might be made, or an update on the application. They said the delay was affecting his employment prospects because prospective employers would not accept his travel document in place of a passport.
The Minister’s correspondence gave no decision timetable. In January 2012, after about 44 months, Mr Mansouri obtained leave to seek an order requiring a decision and a declaration that the delay was unreasonable. The Minister decided to grant naturalisation on 4 May 2012, after the proceedings began, and notified his solicitors on 10 May. The remaining issue was costs.
The Minister’s evidence said the application had been assigned in June 2008 to a group requiring particular security checks, including requests to external agencies. Information from those agencies arrived in March 2012, after which the application was processed and a recommendation submitted. The Minister said the inquiries did not reflect negatively on Mr Mansouri’s character. The court made no finding that they did.
The judge said the fuller explanation came only during the costs hearing. The Minister could not disclose the nature of the checks or the agencies involved, citing national security, but the court said basic information about the existence of the inquiry, its effect on the application and the expected delay could have been given earlier. Without it, Mr Mansouri had been left with formulaic replies and no indication that his case was in a separate queue.
The court considered the proceedings moot for mixed reasons: the decision followed information arriving from outside the Minister’s control, but the Minister’s process depended on that investigation. The judge said the case did not fit solely the category of mootness caused by an external event or by a unilateral act of one party. Although the merits would never be determined, the court found Mr Mansouri had acted reasonably and that the lack of an explanation was a significant factor in deciding costs.
The order was for one half of the costs of the proceedings, including one half of the costs of a motion seeking further particulars and the cross-examination of a departmental official. The court did not order the full costs sought by Mr Mansouri.