Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
IEHC 269 ECLI:IE:HC:2026:269 KI-generiert

High Court certifies appeal on Article 42A rights for non-citizen child under Illegal Immigrants Act 2000.

Geschäftsnummer IEHC 269
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Irland (IE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Gutgeheissen (Allowed)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The High Court granted a certificate of exceptional public importance under Section 5 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000, allowing an appeal to the Court of Appeal. The applicant, a minor, sought to challenge a refusal of leave to remain under the International Protection Act 2015, arguing that the Minister failed to consider the child's best interests under Article 42A of the Constitution. The court agreed that the legal question regarding the rights of non-citizen children in this context warrants immediate appellate review.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

s.5 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000; The High Court may certify an appeal where the substantive decision involves a point of law of exceptional public importance, specifically concerning the best interests of a non-citizen child under Article 42A of the Constitution.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Illegal Immigrants Act 2000 Article 42A Constitution non-citizen child rights best interests principle certificate of exceptional public importance leave to remain International Protection Act 2015

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert

Zitierte Rechtsprechung

KI-generiert

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 5 OF THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

(TRAFFICKING) ACT 2000 (AS AMENDED)

[2026] IEHC 269

Record No. 2024/1368JR

BETWEEN

AAG-A AND OEA

(A MINOR SUING BY HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND) AAG-A

APPLICANTS

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE

RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT of Ms Justice Miriam O’Regan, delivered on the 6th day of May 2026.

1. Following delivery of the substantive judgment in these proceedings on 4 March 2026, the applicants now seek leave pursuant to s.5 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000, as amended, (“the 2000 Act”) for a certificate that the Court’s decision involves a point, or points, of law of exceptional public importance and it is desirable in the public interest that an appeal be taken.

2. The applicant had been refused leave to remain, in a Ministerial decision of 13 August 2024, under s.49(7) of the International Protection Act 2015, which decision the applicant has sought to challenge in these proceedings.

3. The issue for such a certificate engages the bests interests of a child under the provisions of Article 42A of Bunreacht na hÉireann.

4. The case proceeded on the basis that it was a test case with approximately six other applications on hold pending the outcome of the within matter.

5. The applicant submits and the respondent accepts that the issue raised involves a point of law of exceptional public importance and an appeal is desirable in the public interest having regard to the Glancré principles (Glancré Teoranta v An Bord Pleanála [2006] IEHC 250). I too am satisfied that the consideration of the position of a non-citizen child under the provisions of Article 42A of the Constitution aforesaid, in the circumstances which arose in these proceedings, does qualify for the certificate requested by the applicants under s.5(6)(a) of the 2000 Act.

6. I certify that the substantive judgement involves a point of law of exceptional public importance and that it is desirable in the public interest that an appeal should be taken to the Court of Appeal. The questions arising are: -

(a) What rights and/or entitlements does Article 42A of Bunreacht na hÉireann confer on a non-citizen child in the context of the exercise of discretion by the Minister to grant permission to remain pursuant to s.49(7) of the International Protection Act 2015?

(b) In respect of the non-citizen child, where that child’s other family members have no right to reside and/or remain in the State is the Minister required to look beyond the material and arguments advanced by or on behalf of an applicant and/or the facts of which the Minister is on notice when considering the best interests of the noncitizen child in the context of the exercise of the Minister’s discretion to grant permission to remain pursuant to s.49 of the International Protection Act 2015?