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.
Supplementary Judgment of Ms. Justice Finlay Geoghegan delivered the 14 th day of November, 2006.
The third named applicant was born in Ireland on 14 th November, 2001 and is and Irish citizen. He has resided in the State since the date of his birth. The first named applicant is his father and a Romanian national. The second named applicant is his mother and a Romanian national. They arrived in the State in October, 2001 and have lived as a family unit with their son in the State since that date.
The first and second named applicants made an application on IBC/05. On 12 th September, 2005 the application of each was refused. It is common case that each had been convicted of a shoplifting offence. The substantive terms of the letters refusing their applications were in the following terms:
Subsequent to those refusals the solicitors for the applicants wrote requesting that the respondent reconsider the position in light of the submissions made. These included reference to the position of the Irish citizen child. By two further letters of 24 th November, 2005 it was stated:
By order of the High Court (Peart J.) of 12 th December, 2005 the applicants were granted leave to seek certain reliefs by way of judicial review including an order of certiorari quashing the decisions of 24 th November, 2005.
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.