Okenla v Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform & Ors, [2005] IEHC 37 (2005)

Docket Number:2003 255JR
Judge:Peart J.

Neutral Citation No. [2005] IEHC 37 THE HIGH COURT Record Number: 2003 No. 255 JRBETWEEN:ADEGBOYEGA GABRIEL ADESINA OKENLAAPPLICANTANDTHE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM, ANGELA WILLIS, IRELAND, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERALRESPONDENTSJudgment of Mr Justice Michael Peart delivered the 10th day of February 2005:"Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive" - Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, 1808.The experience of having listened to the affidavits opened to the Court in this case, the arguments ably made by Counsel on both sides, and my re-reading of those affidavits and exhibits for the purpose of deciding whether to grant leave in this case, has immediately put in mind the above quotation. Seldom has it seemed so apt in a legal context. Even allowing for the fact that some of the content of the respondents' replying affidavit is to be regarded as hearsay, and perhaps inadmissible on a certain view of the nature of the Court's decision in the event that leave be refused, it is impossible to escape a conclusion that in the months and years leading up to the final events which give rise to the present application, this applicant, under various different versions of his name, and indeed possibly under different names, and using different passports, has played 'ducks and drakes' with the immigration and asylum procedures in this State. If sympathy on the part of the Court for what befell him eventually was a requirement of justice, he would surely be entitled to none.I do not propose to set out, or perhaps I should say more accurately, attempt to set out in any detail the web of deceit and intrigue indulged in by this applicant lest by so doing I stray upon the ground to be travelled over again in the hearing of the substantive application which with great hesitation and some regret I feel compelled to allow. I will add for the sake of completeness that no view I have formed as to the bona fides of this applicant and the lack of candour, honesty and openness which he has shown in his dealings with the agencies of this State, should in any way influence any Judge called upon to hear the substantive application, and who will have to form his/her own view.The only merit which I can see in the present application arises from a point in time after the involvement of the applicant's present solicitors. It would appear that the notification of the proposal to make a deportation order was, while sent to the address which the Minister had on...

To continue reading