Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The application for leave came on for hearing before O'Sullivan J. in the High Court. Following a full hearing the learned judge reserved his decision overnight. On 7 th November 2003 O'Sullivan J. delivered an ex-tempore judgment and on 10 th November 2003 he made an order extending the applicants' time for making their application for leave to apply for judicial review up to and including 6 th November 2003. In addition O'Sullivan J. granted leave to apply for the following reliefs:
The grounds on which leave was granted were set out in the statement of grounds as follows:
Leave was refused in respect of the other reliefs sought by the applicants. The order of the High Court also placed a stay on the implementation by the respondent of the deportation orders made in respect of the applicants pending the final outcome of the judicial review proceedings.
Subsequent to the delivery of the judgment of the learned High Court judge application was made on behalf of the respondent pursuant to section 5(3)(a) of the Act of 2000 for leave to appeal against the determination of the court. O'Sullivan J. granted leave to appeal and in his composite order of 10 th November provided as follows:
As matters unfolded during the hearing before this court, however, the main and practically the only question fully dealt with was the preliminary but crucial issue of the extension of time.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.