Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 343: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for a stamp four in respect of a person (details supplied); when a decision will issue on the application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25563/10]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am advised by the Irish Naturalisation & Immigration Service (INIS) that the person in question was initially registered in the State as the spouse of an Irish national on 17 November 2003 and granted permission to remain in the State for 5 years up to 16 November 2008 resulting in a stamp 4 registration. The person in question did not subsequently renew their permission to reside in the State on that basis prior to its expiry date. This permission has now lapsed.

The INIS informs me that no application for a Stamp 4 registration has been received to date from the person concerned on the basis of being married to an Irish national.

I am advised that the person concerned can make an application for residency in writing on the basis of marriage to an Irish national to the Spouse of Irish National Unit, Immigration Services Section, Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2.

Information detailing the requirements for such applications can be found on the INIS website - www.inis.gov.ie - by selecting Immigration and then Spouse of an Irish National.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 344: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application in respect of a person (details supplied); when a decision will issue on the application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25564/10]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to inform the Deputy that the person to whom he refers is a dependant of a family unit granted permission to remain in the State under the IBC/05 Scheme. In October of 2007, she was granted permission to remain in the State in line with that granted to her father. This permission is valid until 28 July, 2010. The person in question is advised to write to the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2, with a view to having her permission to remain in the State renewed.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 345: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding applications in respect of persons (details supplied); when a decision will issue on the applications; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25565/10]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have been informed by the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS) that the first named applicant referred to by the Deputy arrived in the State on 30 December 1999 and claimed asylum. On the basis of her parentage of an Irish born child, she was granted permission to remain in the State in May 2001. This permission to remain in the State has been extended to 2011.

The second applicant referred to by the Deputy arrived in the State on 2 March 2007 on foot of a C-Visit Visa for a short term visit and was granted permission to remain in the State until 1 June 2007. On 23 May 2007, the applicant applied for an extension to his permission to remain in the State. This application was refused on 30 May 2007 and upheld on appeal on 1 August 2007. Subsequently, following the consideration of the case under Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended) and Section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended) on the Prohibition of Refoulement, a Deportation Order was signed in respect of the second applicant concerned on 20 August, 2009.

The applicants concerned initiated Judicial Review Proceedings in the High Court on 15 September, 2009 challenging the decision to make a Deportation Order. As these proceedings are ongoing, the matter is subjudice and it would not be appropriate for me to comment further on this case at this time.