De Souza v Minister for Justice and Equality

 
FREE EXCERPT

[2018] IEHC 31

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Humphreys J.

[2017 No. 728 J.R.]

BETWEEN
MARCIO DUQUE DE SOUZA
ERICA PIRES DA COSTA SOUZA
KAMYLLE DA COSTA SOUZA (A MINOR SUING BY HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND MARCIO DUQUE DE SOUZA)
ALYNE DA COSTA SOUZA (A MINOR SUING BY HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND MARCIO DUQUE DE SOUZA)
EMANUELLE DA COSTA SOUZA (A MINOR SUING BY HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND MARCIO DUQUE DE SOUZA)
APPLICANTS
AND
THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

AND

IRELAND
RESPONDENTS

Asylum, Immigration & Nationality - Non-visa required nationals - Rejection of application for regularisation of status - Deportation - Judicial review - Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights ('ECHR')

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 12th day of January, 2018
1

The applicants are a family from Brazil. The father arrived in the State as a non-visa required national with a visitor permission that expired on 17th October, 2010. Notwithstanding his illegal presence in the State, he found employment in a meat factory. The wife and the two eldest children, who were born in Brazil, arrived in Ireland, in 2011 again as non-visa required nationals. Their visitor permissions expired on the 31st August, 2011, and they have been illegally present in the State since then. The fifth named applicant, the youngest child, was born in the State on 29th April, 2013. The applicants made representations seeking regularisation of their status in the State, which were unsuccessful. They were notified of a proposal to make deportation orders. Representations were made in response which included referring to the close relationship between the children and maternal grandparents and uncles who are lawfully resident in the State. Notwithstanding these representations, deportation orders were made on 9th August, 2017, and are now challenged in these proceedings. I have received helpful submissions from Mr. Gary O'Halloran B.L. (with Mr. Mark de Blacam S.C. for the applicants) and from Ms. Denise Brett S.C. (with Mr. Tim O'Connor B.L. for the respondents).

The alleged entitlement pursuant to the McMahon report
2

The applicants never made any submission that the Report of the Working Group on Improvements to the Protection Process (the McMahon report) should be...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL