Onifade v Minister for Justice and Equality
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys |
| Judgment Date | 14 November 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] IEHC 644 |
| Docket Number | [2016 No. 761 J.R.] |
| Court | High Court |
| Date | 14 November 2016 |
[2016] IEHC 644
THE HIGH COURT
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Humphreys J.
[2016 No. 761 J.R.]
Asylum, Immigration & Nationality – S. 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 – Deportation order – Leave to seek judicial review – S. 5 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000
Facts: The applicant sought leave to apply for judicial review in relation to a deportation order made against him by the respondent. The applicant argued that the making of the deportation order against him was unfair as his new solicitors had not received the relevant file and thus, he was not permitted to make the required submissions.
Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys refused to grant leave to apply for judicial review. The Court held that it was the duty of the applicant to act quickly when the time period to respond to the proposal to the letter of deportation ran out and the applicant's current solicitors became involved. The Court observed that there was no obligation on the respondent to wait until the representations were made by the applicant. The Court held that there were limited circumstances in which the respondent was put on inquiry before making any adverse order and the present case did not fall into that category.
The applicant arrived in the State from Nigeria, via the UK, on 21st April, 2014.
He entered the State clandestinely without permission by travelling from Belfast to Dublin. Shortly after his arrival he met a Ms. Glarington Agbofodoh. They married in December, 2014. The applicant's wife had become an Irish citizen in 2013.
On 25th June, 2015, the applicant's previous solicitors made an application for permission to remain in the State on the basis of his marriage to an Irish national. The Nigerian passport submitted as part of that application was damaged. When the application was refused on 12th January, 2016, reliance was placed on the question of the passport, as well as the applicant's wife's income level and the applicant's actions in coming to the State and remaining here without permission. The refusal was affirmed on appeal by the respondent on 13th April, 2016.
On 16th May, 2016, the applicant received a proposal to deport letter. He attended the office of his previous solicitors, but it appears that no reply to the proposal to deport letter was sent.
On 13th July, 2016, the applicant instructed his current solicitors. They contacted the previous solicitors, requesting his file, but it is suggested that he had not settled his account with those solicitors and therefore, predictably, the file was not forthcoming.
On 15th July, 2016, the applicant's solicitors wrote to the respondent stating that they were now acting for the applicant, that they had requested the file and that they understood that the previous solicitors had reopened the application for permission to remain. The respondent acknowledged that letter on 20th July, 2016, stating that there was no permission to remain, application pending. The present solicitors did not, in fact, make any submissions...
To continue reading
Request your trial