M.I. (Pakistan) v Minister for Justice and Equality

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys
• Judgment Date: 22 January 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IEHC 33
• Docket Number: [2018 No. 5 I.A.]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 22 January 2018

[2018] IEHC 33

THE HIGH COURT

Humphreys J.

[2018 No. 5 I.A.]

BETWEEN

M.I. (PAKISTAN)

APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY

RESPONDENT

Asylum, Immigration and Nationality - Detention - Injunction - Readmission to the protection process - Deportation

Facts: The applicant filed an application for an ex parte injunction to restrain the respondent not to deport the applicant. The applicant applied for the ex parte injunction without any affidavit or papers. The applicant contended that he had applied for readmission to the protection process, which was refused, and that refusal was under appeal. The applicant contended that he could not be deported pending the determination of his appeal.

Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys dismissed the applicant's application. The Court held that the application for the injunction had no merit. The Court held that the readmission to the protection process of the applicant was made only after the applicant's arrest. The Court noted that the process was prima facia abusive and made for the purposes of delay.

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 22nd day of January, 2018

1 Before the court is an application by Mr. Garry O'Halloran B.L. on behalf of the applicant for an ex parte injunction in an intended action by Mr. M.I. who is proposed to be deported at 11.10 am this morning from Dublin to Pakistan. Mr. O'Halloran has applied for an ex parte injunction without the benefit of an affidavit, or indeed any papers, other than his instructions, which are as follows.

2 Mr. M.I. has apparently been in detention for some weeks, having been a failed protection seeker. Apparently after his detention he applied for readmission to the protection process. That application was refused on 15th January, 2018, and that refusal is under appeal.

3 Mr. O'Halloran submits firstly that the applicant is taken by surprise by the proposal to deport him pending an appeal. It seems to me that he cannot be legitimately surprised because any right to remain by virtue of a re-application only applies to the first instance process, not to the appellate process (see S.H.M. v. Minister for Justice and Equality [2015] IEHC 829 [2015] 12 JIC 2115, at para. 18).

4 Secondly, it seems that the applicant has already been in considerable jeopardy from at least the point in time at which he was detained, which was some weeks ago. On that basis it seems to me...