In the matter of section 5 of the Illegal Immigrant (Trafficking) Act, 2000 (As Amended) between A.Z, M.Z, and C.Z (A minor suing by his mother and next friend M.Z.) v The Minister for Justice and Equality (Unapproved) [2024] IESC 35 (25 July 2024)

In the matter of section 5 of the Illegal Immigrant (Trafficking) Act, 2000 (As Amended) between A.Z, M.Z, and C.Z (A minor suing by his mother and next friend M.Z.) v The Minister for Justice and Equality (Unapproved) [2024] IESC 35 (25 July 2024)

The Minister failed to properly identify and weigh the individual constitutional rights and best interests of the Irish citizen child under Article 42A in the s. 3(11) decision refusing to revoke the deportation order. The absence of express consideration of Article 42A and the failure to treat the child's interests as a primary or paramount consideration rendered the decision unlawful. The proceedings were not an impermissible collateral attack, as new and significant information justified a fresh consideration.

Citation
[2024] IESC 35
Parties
Applicant/respondent: A. Z.; Applicant/respondent: M. Z.; Applicant/respondent: C. Z. (A minor suing by his mother and next friend M. Z.); Respondent/appellant: The Minister for Justice and Equality
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (judicial Review) / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed
Legal Topics
Deportation, Revocation of Deportation Order, Best Interests of the Child, Article 42 a of the Constitution, Zambrano Rights, Collateral Attack, Proportionality Assessment
Immigration Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Family Law European Union Law Deportation Revocation of Deportation Order Best Interests of the Child +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. Z.

Applicant/respondent

M. Z.

Applicant/respondent

C. Z. (A minor suing by his mother and next friend M. Z.)

Applicant/respondent

The Minister for Justice and Equality

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (judicial Review) / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Minister failed to properly consider the best interests and constitutional rights of an Irish citizen child under Article 42A in refusing to revoke a deportation order against his non-national father
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings constituted an impermissible collateral attack on an earlier deportation order
  3. 3 Whether new information justified a fresh consideration under s. 3(11) of the Immigration Act 1999

Ratio Decidendi

The Minister failed to properly identify and weigh the individual constitutional rights and best interests of the Irish citizen child under Article 42A in the s. 3(11) decision refusing to revoke the deportation order. The absence of express consideration of Article 42A and the failure to treat the child's interests as a primary or paramount consideration rendered the decision unlawful. The proceedings were not an impermissible collateral attack, as new and significant information justified a fresh consideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed

Orders

  • Order of certiorari quashing the Minister's decision to refuse to revoke the deportation order affirmed
  • Matter remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with the judgment