Djamba v Minister for Justice and Equality
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Ms. Justice O'Regan |
| Judgment Date | 08 May 2017 |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] IEHC 280 |
| Docket Number | [2017 No. 324 J.R.] |
| Court | High Court |
| Date | 08 May 2017 |
[2017] IEHC 280
THE HIGH COURT
JUDICIAL REVIEW
O'Regan J.
[2017 No. 324 J.R.]
AND
Asylum, Immigration & Nationality – S. 27 of the Interpretation Act 2005 – Effect of repeal of Regulations (Statutory Instrument 426 of 2013) – S. 6 (2) (n) of the International Protection Act 2015 – Entitlement to apply for family reunification
Facts: The applicants sought leave to apply for judicial review of a decision of the respondent wherein the respondent notified the applicant that the first named applicant was no longer entitled to apply for family reunification in relation to the second and fifth applicants. The first applicant contended that by virtue of s. 27 of the Interpretation Act 2005, the repeal of Regulations (Statutory Instrument 426 of 2013) by s. 6 (2) (n) of the International Protection Act 2015 did not affect the first applicant's right to apply for family reunification.
Ms. Justice O'Regan refused to grant leave to the applicants. The Court held that the applicants did not file any application at the date of coming into force of the 2015 Act and the right asserted by them was merely a right to take benefit under the new enactment. The Court noted that the entitlement to apply for family reunification was not a vested right and therefore, the presumption under s. 27 of the 2005 Act did not arise. The Court held that the presumption of entitlement to apply for family reunification did not appear expressly or from the context of the amending legislation.
The applicants herein are seeking leave to apply for judicial review of a decision of the respondent notified to the applicants on 31st March 2017 to the effect that the first named applicant is no longer entitled to apply for family reunification in respect of the second to fifth applicants, all of whom are minors.
The grounds supporting the application are to the effect that by virtue of s. 27 of the Interpretation Act 2005 the repeal of the relevant subsidiary protection Regulations ( Statutory Instrument 426 of 2013) by s. 6 (2) (n) of the International Protection Act of 2015 does not affect the first applicant's right to apply for family reunification that was acquired or accrued under the 2013 Regulations without being subject to a time limit of twelve months.
Written submissions have been tendered. These identify that since the coming into force of the International Protection Act 2015 there is now a time limit of twelve months from the given, under s. 47, of the refugee declaration, or, as the case may be, subsidiary protection declaration, to the sponsor to apply for family reunification by virtue of s. 56 (8) of the 2015 Act. The first applicant's argument was to the effect that he was granted subsidiary protection in February 2015 at which time there was no time limit within which he might make the application the subject matter of the impugned decision of 31st March 2017.
The applicant relies upon s. 27 (1) (c) of the Interpretation Act...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
X v Minister for Justice & Equality
...a vested right to such reunification. Reference was made to a decision of the High Court in the case of Djamba v. Minister for Justice [2017] IEHC 280 in which leave was refused to challenge a decision of the Minister to the effect that the first named applicant was no longer entitled to ap......