The High Court has quashed a decision refusing an Indian citizen’s appeal against the refusal of a visa to take up a job as a tandoori chef in County Roscommon. The case was remitted to a different officer of the Minister for Justice for reconsideration; the court did not grant the visa.
In a judgment delivered on 17 October 2022, Ms Justice Bolger found that the appeal decision of 15 October 2020 did not give adequate reasons and could not be justified by explanations added later in court proceedings. The judge also found that the decision lacked a sufficient basis for concluding that the applicant lacked the required skills or would fail to observe visa conditions.
The applicant had received a work permit in June 2020 for a position at Bombay Palace restaurant in Castlerea. The prospective employer’s permit application described the job as making specialist tandoori bread and preparing marinades, sauces and doughs. It did not say the applicant would be required to cook chicken dishes. The employer said it was satisfied with his experience as a tandoori chef.
The applicant told the visa interviewer that he would cook Indian breads. The Minister’s appeal refusal later said he could not explain recipes for dishes he would be expected to cook in Ireland. The judge found that the applicant had named chicken tikka when asked what was on the restaurant menu, but had not said he would be required to cook it. The court said there was no sufficient basis for treating his answers about chicken recipes as evidence that he could not perform the job described in the permit application.
The refusal also cited insufficient documentation, inconsistencies and doubts that the visa conditions would be observed, without explaining what documents were missing, what the contradictions were or why the applicant might not comply. The judge noted that the applicant’s solicitor had asked during the appeal process for any additional required documents to be identified. The Minister’s later affidavit raised issues including a supplementary form and evidence of work experience that had not been specified in the appeal decision.
The judgment also criticised the treatment of two work references. The Minister said they could not be verified, but the references included mobile numbers that were not called, and one may have included a website. The court found no explanation for why those details could not be used to check them.
The court granted certiorari, quashing the 15 October 2020 appeal refusal and remitting the matter to a different ministerial officer. It gave an indicative view that the applicant should receive his costs, but listed the case for further submissions on costs and final orders on 1 November. The judgment therefore records the quashing and remittal, while leaving those further matters for the subsequent hearing.