Wen Wei & Ting Ting v Minister for Justice & anor

EMNireland

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice and the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána
Court/s:Court of Appeal, Supreme Court
Nature of Proceedings:Appeal
Judgment Date/s:19 Dec 2024
Judge:Woulfe, S., Hogan, G., O’Donnell
Category:Immigration law
Keywords:Border control, Entry (Refusal of), Non-EU National, Refusal of leave to land, Student, Visa
Country of Origin:Malaysia
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/d56fd777-f75b-4b75-a57c-14e76b9e95c0/[2024]_IESC__58_Woulfe%20J.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The appellants were two Malaysian nationals who sought permission to land and enter the State at Cork Airport in December 2020 in order to start an English language course in January 2021. They were refused permission to land because the course was to be conducted online and not in person. This decision was made at the time of the … Read More

Principles:The reference to public policy in the refusal of leave to land ground under section 4(3)(j), Immigration Act 2004 should be understood as distinct from national security and as granting wide discretion to the Minister.
Go Back

Akram v Minister for Justice and Equality and the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána

admin

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána
Court/s:Court of Appeal
Citation/s:[2022] IECA 108
Nature of Proceedings:Judicial Review/Appeal
Judgment Date/s:12 May 2022
Judge:Donnelly, A., Ní Raifeartaigh, U., Power, A.
Category:Immigration, Immigration law
Keywords:Border control, Detention, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Country of Origin:Pakistan
URL:https://courts.ie/acc/alfresco/62535f02-327f-472c-bf28-9244c0ea6b0a/2022_IECA_108_Donnelly%20J..pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Facts: The applicant, a national of Pakistan and a student in Cyprus, was refused leave to land at Dublin Airport on 21 October 2017. While he held a visa for the State, he was refused leave to land pursuant to section 4(3)(k), Immigration Act 2004, on the grounds that there was reason to believe that he intended to enter the … Read More

Principles:When refusing leave to land, a mobile phone is among the documents that can be searched under section 7(3) of the Immigration Act 2004, however, the copying and retention of documents obtained from a mobile phone is not permitted under this section.
Go Back

Pachero v Minister for Justice and Equality

adminLeave a Comment

Respondent/Defendant:Minister for Justice and Equality et al
Court/s:High Court
Nature of Proceedings:High Court of Ireland; Inter Partes; Application mandatory injunction by way of Judicial Review
Judgment Date/s:29 Dec 2011
Judge:Hogan J
Category:Deportation
Keywords:Border Crossing, Deportation, Immigration
URL:http://www.courts.ie/judgments.nsf/6681dee4565ecf2c80256e7e0052005b/d52e538177f9f42e802579a400538785?OpenDocument
Geographic Focus:Ireland

Facts The applicants, a young married couple form Boliva (a visa exempt state), arrived at Dublin airport and were given  leave to land by an immigration officer under s. 4 of the Immigration Act 2004. Believing they could avail of the common travel area, they travelled via Northern Ireland to Scotland (en route to visit an aunt in England) and … Read More

Principles:

A permission previously granted under s. 4(1) of the Immigration Act 2004 lapses once the applicant leaves the State.

Go Back

Ejerenwa v Governor of Cloverhill Prison

emnadmin

Respondent/Defendant:Governor of Cloverhill Prison
Court/s:Supreme Court
Citation/s:2011 IESC 41, 28th October 2011, Unreported
Nature of Proceedings:Article 40.4.2 Enquiry
Judgment Date/s:28 Oct 2011
Judge:Denham C.J.
Category:Deportation, Detention
Keywords:Asylum Seeker, Border Crossing, Deportation, Detainee, Detention, Entry (Illegal), Nationality, Non-EU National, Non-national, Refoulement, Refoulement (Non-), Removal, Removal Order, Third-Country National, Third-Country national found to be illegally present
Country of Origin:Contested
URL:https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/e9112918-ca1e-4951-b432-19ca4e38ba69/2011_IESC_41_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH
Geographic Focus:Ireland

This case involved an appeal to the Supreme Court in respect of an application brought under Article 40.4.2 of the Constitution of Ireland. The High Court had found that the Applicant’s detention was in accordance with law. The Applicant appealed this to the Supreme Court. On the evening of 1 August 2011, Gardai stopped a bus which had crossed the … Read More

Principles:
  1. A detention order should contain clear information on its face as to the basis of its jurisdiction. In respect of s. 5(2)(a) of the Immigration Act 2003, in particular, it is necessary for a detention order to state on its face which provision or provisions of s. 5(1) of that Act apply.
  2. A warrant of detention is not required to make statements of law, and it is not necessary for a detention order to show on its face the time permitted for detention, where the period permitted for detention is a matter of general law and/or provided by statute.
Go Back