EMN Ireland | www.emn.ie

Case Law

<< Back

Lobe & Osayande v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

A.O. & D.L.

Respondent/Defendant: Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
Citation/s: [2003] 1 IR 1
[2003] 3 ICLMD 57
Court/s: Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Judgment Date/s: 23 January 2003
Judge: Smyth
Category:Citizenship, Deportation
Keywords:Citizenship; Deportation; Deportation Order;

The Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal determined that both sets of applicants’ asylum claims should be processed in other Member States pursuant to the Dublin Convention and that the applicants should be removed to those countries. The applicants challenged these decisions by way of judicial review. Both couples had an Irish child and they argued that, pursuant to Article 2 and Article 40.3.1 of the Constitution, the Irish children had a right to reside in Ireland with their parents  and that the families had rights under Article 41.1.1, Article 41.2 and Article 42 of the Constitution.

The Court refused judicial review and held that there were grave and substantial reasons associated with the common good that required that the residence of the parents within the State should be terminated, even though, in order to remain a family unit, their children would also have to leave the State. The Court stated that in determining individual cases, the Minister should take account of factors such as the length of time the family had residence in the State, the effectiveness of the immigration laws of the State and the provisions of the Dublin Convention.

The Court held that the ruling of Fajujonu v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform did not mean that the Minister had no power to deport the parents of an Irish born child.

Principles: The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has a power to deport non-Irish parents of Irish children where there are grave and substantial reasons associated with the common good to do so, even if Irish children are removed from the State as a consequence. In dealing with such cases, the Minister should take into account factors such as the length of time the family had residence in the State, the effectiveness of the immigration laws of the State and the provisions of the Dublin Convention.

Download Adobe Acrobat Reader PDF

Key European case law

A Member State is obliged to examine an asylum application if transfer would expose the applicant to a serious risk of a violation of fundamental rights

Court of Justice of the EU ruling on the transfer of asylum seekers under the EU Dublin Regulation Cases C-411/10 and C-493/10 M.E.


McCarthy: Rights of EU citizens to regularise the residence of their non-EU spouse

Court of Justice of the EU judgment in the case of McCarthy v Secretary of State for the Home Department (in UK).


Zambrano: Rights of non-EU parents of a child with European citizenship to live in the EU

Court of Justice of the EU judgment in the case of Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (in Belgium).

Back to top