Member Login

Reasons given by Minister for refusal of a residency card were detailed and coherent

By: Colm Scott Byrne BL

or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments

Court of Appeal dismisses appeal and affirms decision of the High Court refusing judicial review of a decision by the Minister to refuse the appellant a residence card as a permitted family member of his cousin, a citizen of the United Kingdom who, at the material time, resided and worked in the State in the exercise of his free movement rights as Union citizen, on the grounds that: (a) the trial judge was correct that the appellant did have standing to (without being joined by his cousin as co-applicant) to bring and maintain the judicial review; (b) a Member State is permitted to refine or illustrate or identify the criteria in order to assist a person to understand the meaning of “dependant” or “household” as the case may be, but that does not preclude that transposition might well be effectively done by using the words of the Citizens Directive itself; (c) the trial judge was correct that the reasons given by the Minister for refusing the application were detailed and coherent; and (d) it would be inappropriate to make a preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice when the Supreme Court is being asked to consider a similar request in another case.

Baker J (nem diss): Judicial review - family law - asylum and immigration - European Union law - appeal of a decision of the High Court refusing judicial review of a decision by the Minister to refuse the appellant a residence card as a permitted family member of his cousin, a citizen of the United Kingdom who, at the material time, resided and worked in the State in the exercise of his free movement rights as Union citizen - Directive 2004/38/EC On the Right of Citizens of the Union and Their Family Members to Move and Reside Freely Within the Territory of the Member States, O.J. L158/77 30.4.2004 (the “Citizens Directive”) - r. 21 of the European Communities (Free Movement of Persons) No. 2 Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 656/2006), as amended (“the 2006 Regulations”) - r. 7(2) of the 2006 Regulations - the appellant is a Pakistani national who entered the State from the United Kingdom on 20 August 2014 as both a dependent and a member of the household of his first cousin, a British citizen born - the appellant's cousin entered the State two weeks prior to the appellant and they reside in the same rented accommodation within the State - an application was submitted by the appellant for a residence card - the Minister refused the application on the basis as it was decided the appellant could not be treated as a permitted family member of his Union citizen first cousin as he had not shown dependence upon him nor that he was a member of the household of his first cousin in the United Kingdom - whether the appellant he appellant had locus standi to bring the judicial review - whether the Citizens Directive has been properly transposed into national law - whether these matters raised were matters of EU law which require this Court to make a preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice - trial judge correct with approach taken - appeal dismissed.

Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *