Court places stay on deportation of Nigerian family
The High Court has today placed a stay on deportation orders against a Nigerian woman and her three children, two of whom have serious intellectual difficulties, until their legal challenge against the orders has been determined.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Hogan said he was prepared to grant the stay as "he was of the view the family should not be disadvantaged" by the fact that their leave application "has yet to be determined".
In proceedings against the Minister for Justice, the family, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, have challenged a decision made on behalf of the Minister on August 18 last to deport them, after their application for asylum was rejected.
One of the children has been diagnosed as being on the autistic spectrum while the other has serious speech and language difficulties.
The mother came to Ireland in 2004. She had a relationship with a man here, and had three children here. The children are not Irish citizens.
Last September, the family sought permission from Court to bring a challenge aimed at quashing the deportation orders. However, the State gave an undertaking not to deport the family until October 3 last, but declined to give an undertaking beyond that date.
The family then sought an injunction preventing their deportation until their challenge had been decided.
Lawyers for the Minister opposed the application for an injunction on grounds including that the family's challenge was doomed to fail, and that there were no special circumstances in this case.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Gerard Hogan said he was satisfied to grant the family a stay on the deportation orders until the full hearing of their challenge against those orders has been determined, absent of special circumstances.
Mr Justice Hogan, noting the contents of a number of reports relating placed before the court, said the information before him was that treatment for children with autism is available in Nigeria, but that only a tiny majority of children who require these services can access such treatment in Nigeria.
As far as the majority of children with autism are concerned, he added, "such treatment is in practice unavailable".
He noted that a report on the child with autism stated the boy "reacts very badly" to changes in his routine or environment, while his brother who has speech and language difficulties "reacts very seriously" to new situations as they cause him distress, upset and emotional trauma.
The Judge added that the children's mother has "striven valiantly, along with social services to provide the best case for her children".
The Judge who said while there were "profound humanitarian considerations in the present case" other decisions from the High Court made it clear "the mere fact that medical and healthcare resources in the applicants country of origin are significant worse than here did not in itself merit judicial intervention".
However, the Judge said there is a requirement in law that all matters be fairly examined before any deportation order is made. While the family, he said, would "no doubt argue at the full hearing that this did not occur in their case".
At this juncture, he added, it could not be said the family's case was "unsustainable in law", and that they were entitled to a stay.
