Abdul Qadoos Masood v The Minister for Justice

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Ms Justice Sara Phelan
• Judgment Date: 10 September 2025
• Neutral Citation: [2025] IEHC 485
• Court: High Court
• Docket Number: Record No. 2024/270 JR

Between

Abdul Qadoos Masood

Applicant

and

The Minister for Justice

Respondent

[2025] IEHC 485

Record No. 2024/270 JR

THE HIGH COURT JUDICIAL REVIEW

JUDGMENT of Ms Justice Sara Phelan delivered on the 10 ^th day of September 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction	1
Factual Background	2
Procedural Background	7
Discussion	7
Preliminary issue	8
Decision-making process	8
Can the decision survive on other grounds?	26
Lack of candour	26
Conclusion	32
Costs	32

Introduction

1 This judgment concerns the refusal by the respondent to grant an employment visa to the applicant. And whether the circumstances of such refusal were inter alia in breach of the applicant's rights to fair procedures and/or whether:

• a. the respondent acted irrationally in holding that information provided by the applicant in support of his visa application could not be verified;

• b. the respondent fell into error by finding that the applicant did not demonstrate a qualification to be employed as ‘head chef’;

• c. the respondent acted arbitrarily and/or irrationally and/or fettered her discretion in counting it against the applicant that he did not submit either a contract (in respect of his then current employment) or any revenue records, in circumstances where the applicant had offered an explanation as to why he did not have such documents.

2 The applicant is seeking an order of certiorari quashing the respondent's decision refusing the applicant an employment visa in the particular circumstances of this case and an order remitting the aforesaid employment visa application to a different official within the Department of Justice for further consideration. For the reasons set out hereunder, the relief sought is granted.

Factual Background

3 The applicant is an Afghan national, who has been, and still is, residing in Pakistan as a refugee for approximately 20 years.

4 For the applicant to be lawfully employed in the Irish State, he required two authorisations, being firstly, an employment permit and secondly, a visa (often referred to as an employment visa). The authorisations are issued by two different government departments, respectively the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (“DETE”) and the Department of Justice. As of the date of the order of the High Court (15 April 2024) granting leave to issue judicial review proceedings, the applicant was in receipt of an employment permit – valid from 28 February 2023 to 27 February 2025 – but as of the hearing of the judicial review application (08 April 2025), such permit had expired and the applicant had been refused a second employment permit on inter alia the grounds that he had not taken up the first permit. It is clear that the reason why the applicant had not taken up the first permit was that his application for an employment visa had been refused.

5 The respondent's decision to refuse, on appeal, the applicant's application for an employment visa (“the impugned decision”) was notified to the applicant by letter dated 04 December 2023. This was the culmination of a process that had commenced when the applicant, on foot of being granted the aforesaid employment permit, applied to the respondent for an employment visa in February 2023. As regards the employment permit, the applicant had been sponsored – by a limited liability company operating a Camille Thai franchise – to come to Ireland to work as a chef de partie on a full-time permanent contract at a given salary, the applicant having experience working as a chef de partie in a restaurant in Peshawar, Pakistan since June 2016. The documentation before the Court identified details such as the applicant's salary, the name of the restaurant in Peshawar, details of his prospective employer in the State etc, but here (and in other parts of this judgment) such information has been presented in a form that minimises the potential for intrusion upon third parties.

6 The visa application process was completed online by the applicant on 07 February 2023 and the applicant was advised (as stated on the visa application form) as to the documents he was required to bring with him to the VAC (visa application centre, in Islamabad, Pakistan) when he attended for appointment. These documents included “Supporting documents for the relevant visa category” and the applicant was directed to ““www.irishimmigration.ie” “Visas”” for further information regarding the documents to be brought with him to the VAC. The applicant subsequently attended his appointment at the VAC on 13 February 2023.

7 By letter dated 28 February 2023, the applicant's visa application was refused, with the reasons for refusal at first instance being broadly categorised as:

• — ID (Insufficient documentation) submitted by the applicant in support of his application, no evidence of stated employment submitted, no application letter submitted and insufficient evidence submitted to demonstrate that the applicant had relevant qualifications or employment experience to undertake the proposed employment in the State;

• — F (Finances) – insufficient or incomplete evidence submitted, no personal financial documentation submitted and no business financial documentation submitted;

• — OB (Obligations to return) – the applicant's obligations to return to his home country were not sufficient; and

• — OC (Observe the conditions of the visa) – given that the visa sought was for a specific purpose and duration, the applicant had not satisfied the visa officer that such conditions would be observed.

8 Under cover of letter dated 25 April 2023 from his solicitor, the applicant submitted an appeal, supported by additional (upwards of 20) documents, all of which were exhibited in the applicant's affidavit more particularly referred to at §18 hereunder. To explain the absence of personal financial documentation, the applicant's solicitor set out that:

• a. the applicant had a contract of employment with a limited liability company operating a Camille Thai franchise in the Dublin area, dated 27 November 2022 and a copy of the contract was provided;

• b. the applicant was currently working as a chef de partie in a restaurant in Peshawar, Pakistan and had been working in that employment since June 2016 and a letter from the applicant's employer dated 11 October 2022 was provided, which letter confirmed the nature and duration of the applicant's employment and included the restaurant registration and license number, postal address, email (‘gmail’) address, Whatsapp number and land-line number, and concluded by stating “If you have any question regarding this ref letter please contact us”;

• c. the applicant did not have a contract of employment in relation to his employment in Pakistan, nor did he receive payslips, and that the applicant was paid in cash by his employer and, in circumstances where the applicant did not have a bank account in Pakistan, he spent his wages on his daily living expenses;

• d. this employment was a ‘cash in hand’ role, the applicant did not pay any tax in relation to same, and he was unable to provide any official revenue documents confirming the tax paid for the stated employment.

9 As regards the specific findings under the F (Finances) heading, the applicant's solicitor noted that the applicant was unable to submit any documentation with respect to his personal finances and that he was a national of Afghanistan who had resided in Pakistan for approximately 18 years (as of the date of the visa application) as a refugee. A copy of the applicant's Pakistan Registration Document (‘Registration of Afghan Citizens in Pakistan’) issued on 15 July 2021 was enclosed and the applicant's solicitor further stated that whilst the applicant was permitted to reside in Pakistan, he was not permitted to work and neither was he permitted to open a bank account. Thus, the applicant had never held a bank account in Pakistan and was unable to submit supporting documentation in that regard. However, the applicant's solicitor went on to state that the applicant's Irish employer (“prospective employer”) had undertaken to pay for his flight to Ireland and to pay for his private health insurance policy upon arrival, in addition to providing accommodation to the applicant by way of staff accommodation (located at a specific address, with the owner of the property identified), and that the property had been recently purchased by the prospective employer in order to provide accommodation to his restaurant chefs in circumstances where the lack of affordable rental accommodation in the Dublin housing market had become an extremely prohibitive factor when securing suitably qualified chefs to work for the business. The prospective employer also undertook to make an advanced salary payment to the applicant on his arrival to cover any additional costs which he may have incurred on his arrival.

10 Further, and in relation to the finding that no business financial documentation had been submitted, the applicant's solicitor enclosed a copy of the prospective employer's company directors' report and financial statements for the year ended 31 July 2021, together with a copy of the company's current account statement with a positive closing balance evidenced.

11 In order to deal with the finding that the applicant had submitted insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the applicant had relevant qualifications or employment experience to undertake the proposed employment in the State, the applicant's solicitor noted that the applicant was currently employed as a chef de partie in his current employment since July 2016 but that he had no formal training and had gained all of his skills and knowledge through the course of his employment. The applicant's solicitor further noted that the “Ineligible Category Of Employment” list...