Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 447: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision as regards an application for residency will be made by a person (details supplied)in County Monaghan; and if there is a mechanism to accelerate such a decision. [13371/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An application for permission to remain in the State based on marriage to an Irish national was received from the person concerned in October 2005. Applications of this type, in fairness to all other such applicants, are dealt with in strict chronological order and currently take approximately 16 months to process. It should be noted that marriage to an Irish national does not confer an automatic right of residence in the State.

The Deputy should note that a person who is awaiting a decision on a residency application based on marriage to an Irish national is free to leave the State at any time. A visa required national must be in possession of a valid Irish visa to allow the person concerned travel to the State. As the person in question is a visa required national, he would require a re-entry visa to return to the State. It is not the normal practice of my Department to assist persons who do not have residency in the State with a re-entry visa prior to travelling except in certain emergency circumstances. Applications of this nature are considered on a case by case basis by the immigration division of my Department.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 448: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision was made by the visa office in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Monaghan; the reason behind the decision; if the decision has been appealed; the steps which can be taken to ensure a positive determination. [13372/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The applications referred to by the Deputy were received in the visa office on 11 August 2005. The decision of the visa officer to refuse these applications was made on 18 August 2005. The applications were refused because the visa officer was not satisfied that the applicant had sufficient financial resources to support his family. The visa officer was not satisfied that there would be no recourse to public funds or resources. An appeal against the initial decision was lodged on 29 September 2005. Following a re-examination of the case, the decision to refuse was upheld on 19 October 2005. As each application is entitled to one appeal only, no further review in this matter can be granted; however it is open to the applicant to make a fresh application.