In the matter of section 5 of the Illegal Immigrant (Trafficking) Act, 2000 (As Amended) between A.Z, M.Z, and C.Z (A minor suing by his mother and next friend M.Z.) v The Minister for Justice and Equality (Unapproved)

                  I agree that, in the very particular factual circumstances here, the Minister failed to properly consider the impact of the proposed deportation of AZ on his wife and son and their collective family unit. �

                  As against that, AZ has been married to MZ, who is an Irish citizen, since 2012 (their relationship dates back to 2005) and is father to CZ, born in 2007 and who is also an Irish citizen. The evidence suggests the existence of very real and close bonds of mutual affection between AZ and his wife and son and indicates that he plays a very important role in raising and caring for CZ, who has particular health and developmental issues which it is not necessary to describe in detail.

                  As is evident from Oguekwe , and re-iterated by this Court in IRM v Minister for Justice and Equality [2018] IESC 14 , [2018] 1 IR 417, at paras 112-113, the weight to be given to that factor will depend on all the facts and requires a case-by-case, fact-sensitive assessment by the Minister.

              I agree with Woulfe J's analysis of the important differences in language and scope as between Article 42A.1 and Article 42A.4. I also agree that the provisions of Article 42A.4 are not engaged in the context of deportation.

              For these reasons, and the further reasons set out by Woulfe J in his judgment, with which I agree, I would affirm the order made by Phelan J in the High Court and dismiss the Minister's appeal.