The High Court quashed a decision refusing Luciana Rosa leave to land in Ireland in October 2015, finding that the two grounds recorded by the immigration officer were irrational. Ms Justice Faherty awarded Rosa €1,000 for the three days she was detained before being removed to Brazil, but refused an order directing the State to delete the refusal record.
Rosa, a Brazilian national, had held long-term residence permission and a Stamp 4 card due to expire in November 2015. She had left Ireland for Brazil with her family in June 2011. Her naturalisation application had been approved, subject to her taking an oath and paying a fee, but those steps had not been completed before she left.
When she returned to Dublin Airport on 19 October 2015, Rosa told immigration officers she lived in Brazil and intended to renew her immigration card and pursue naturalisation. The officer refused her leave to land under provisions concerning whether she could support herself and whether she intended to enter for a purpose other than the one stated.
The court rejected Rosa’s argument that her existing residence permission exempted her from applying for leave to land. It held that, under section 4(2) of the Immigration Act 2004, a non-national arriving by air or sea had to apply for permission even if previously granted permission to remain.
However, the judge found the refusal irrational on both recorded grounds. The decision did not explain what other purpose Rosa might have had, despite her presenting her residence card and a letter about her naturalisation approval. The judge also found it was not rational to conclude that Rosa lacked sufficient funds without asking what credit limit was available on the card she presented.
The court proceeded on the basis of the airport report, which recorded €200 in cash and one credit card. Rosa’s solicitor had said she had three cards, each with a €2,000 limit. The judge noted that conflict but found no basis to depart from the airport report’s account of what Rosa had told officers.
The judge declined to deny relief because of Rosa’s conduct in later correspondence about her naturalisation application. She found it disproportionate to refuse to quash the decision, while making clear that she did not condone Rosa giving an Irish address in 2013 when she was living in Brazil and then failing to answer requests about her residence.
The court awarded €1,000 in damages for the deprivation of Rosa’s liberty, taking account of both the three-day detention and her conduct. It refused mandamus, finding that quashing the refusal decision was adequate relief.