A v Minister for Justice & Equality & Ors, S v Minister for Justice & Equality & Ors, I v Minister for Justice & Equality & Ors (Approved)

3.������ In the �A� and �S� cases, Barrett J. delivered a written judgment in A. v. Minister for Justice and Equality ; S and S v. Minister for Justice and Equality [2019] IEHC 547 , and a second judgment concerning the form of the order, A. v. Minister for Justice and Equality No. 2 ; S and S v. Minister for Justice and Equality No. 2 [2019] IEHC 588 . �I� concerns an appeal against the order and judgment of Humphreys J. of 29th October, 2019.

4.������ �A� and �S� deal with appeals against the High Court�s declaration that s. 56(9)(a) of the International Protection Act 2015 (�the 2015 Act�) is repugnant to the Constitution and incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights insofar as it limits the application for family reunification with a spouse to the spouse of a marriage subsisting on the date the sponsor made an application for international protection in the State.

5.������ �I� concerns the question of whether s. 56(8) of the 2015 Act is contrary to the Constitution, and if not, whether it is incompatible with the ECHR. It also concerns the question of whether the proceedings were premature because Ms. I had not submitted an application for a visa for her family pursuant to the first named respondent�s Policy Document on Non-EEA Family Reunification and the issue of whether she had a vested right to family reunification, pursuant to s. 18(3) of the Refugee Act 1996.

7.������ The case of �S� was one in which the parties both agreed a leapfrog appeal to this Court was appropriate in the circumstances and in the Determination the Court noted at para. 4 that:

��������� �While the agreement of the parties is always of value to the court, nevertheless the court must itself be satisfied that the constitutional threshold has been met before permitting an appeal to be brought to this court.�