Fraudulent claim by asylum seeker did not destroy entire claim if genuine cause. Citations: Gazette 08-Nov-1995, Times 07-Nov-1995 Statutes: Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.83264
(Australia) A claim to refugee status was made by a husband and wife who had come from China to Australia. They said that they feared sterilization under the ‘one child policy’ of China if they were returned. Held: There is a general principle that there can only be a ‘particular social group’ within the Convention … Continue reading A v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Another: 1997
The phrase ‘particular social group’ in the Convention does not include groups which a person can choose to leave; It must be a fundamental characteristic of the person, not his job. Citations: Times 26-Nov-1997, Gazette 03-Dec-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2677 Statutes: Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Ouanes: CA 7 Nov 1997
Even the justified fears of being stoned to death for adultery did not create a particular separate group from which protection from persecution could be claimed in support of an application for asylum. A ‘social group’ for refugee applicants, had to share common uniting characteristic which set that group apart from rest of that society. … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Shah and Others: CA 23 Jul 1997
A wife, afraid with cause of being stoned to death for adultery if she returned home, was part of ‘a particular social group’ within the Convention, and was entitled to claim asylum. Commenting on the unique complexity of such cases: ‘Its adjudication is not a conventional lawyer’s exercise of applying a legal litmus test to … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Shah: Admn 25 Oct 1996
Asylum seeker can become refugee applicant if fear still operative. Citations: Times 07-Mar-1997 Statutes: Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 1A(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.79787
Differences in implementation of Convention between different countries were permissible and didn’t make third country policies unacceptable. Citations: Times 26-Mar-1998 Statutes: Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.87841
The appellant sought refugee status. He was a wealthy man, but his life and that of his family had been threatened in Colombia unless he paid 10,000,000 pesos per month to Marxist guerillas. Held: Such a threat was not sufficient to warrant refugee status. The threat did not arise from a well founded fear of … Continue reading Montoya v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 9 May 2002
Bentley had been convicted of the murder of a policeman. He was of low intelligence and he was captured. His co-accused still held a gun. He shouted out ‘Let him have it’ He was convicted, but had said that he had only intended for the gun to be surrendered. A posthumous pardon was sought. Held: … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Bentley: QBD 8 Jul 1993
The mother had applied here for asylum. Her application had been refused but was subject to appeal. The father in India sought the return of the children on the basis that they had been removed from a Convention country which was their habitual residence, and against his will as their father. The mother applied for … Continue reading In re S (Children) (Child abduction: Asylum appeal): FD 24 Apr 2002
The applicant had sought asylum. Her case had been refused, according to the law as stated at that time, but the decision then binding on the adjudicator (Shah), had been reversed in the House of Lords. It had now been held that the women of a country could be seen, at law, as a persecuted … Continue reading Regina (Ivanauskiene) v A Special Adjudicator: CA 31 Jul 2001
Where a country was a signatory to the Convention, but chose to interpret it so as not to give the same protection against oppression by non-state agents which would be given here, the Home Secretary was wrong to certify such countries, in this case France and Germany, as safe countries in which the asylum seekers … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Department (ex parte Adan) and Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department (ex parte Subaskaran) etc: CA 23 Jul 1999
Both applicants, Islam and Shah, citizens of Pakistan, but otherwise unconnected with each other, had suffered violence in Pakistan after being falsely accused them of adultery. Both applicants arrived in the UK and were granted leave to enter as visitors for six months. Both applicants subsequently applied for asylum on the ground that having been … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another ex parte Shah: HL 25 Mar 1999
The degree of protection from non-state persecution available to an asylum seeker, is a relevant factor in asylum applications. Where that protection was inadequate, for reasons not related to the nature of that persecution, that also was relevant. It affected the issues of whether persecution existed, whether the fear of it was well founded, and … Continue reading Horvath v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 2 Dec 1999
When considering the fear of prosecution in an applicant for asylum, the degree of persecution expected from individuals outside the government was to be assessed in the context also of the attitude of the government of the country to such persecution, and the level of protection it was prepared to offer. The failure of state … Continue reading Horvath v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 7 Jul 2000
A stateless asylum applicant who was also unable to return to his previous country of habitual residence, did not become a refugee under the Convention until he displayed a well founded fear of persecution. It was not enough to be unable to return to his former country of residence. The words of the convention clearly … Continue reading Revenko v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 8 Sep 2000
Where a conscientious civil servant was threatened by insurgents who sought to persuade her to use her position to their advantage, but that civil servants could not expected to receive the protection of her estate from such insurgents, the Convention would give her protection as a refugee for asylum. The position of government employees in … Continue reading Noune v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 20 Dec 2000
The degree of protection from non-state persecution available to an asylum seeker is a relevant factor. Where that protection was inadequate for reasons not related to the nature of that persecution, that also was relevant. It affected the issues of whether persecution existed, whether the fear of it was well founded, and whether the fear … Continue reading Howarth v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 8 Dec 1999
The protection given to an asylum applicant is not lost by acts which might otherwise put his stay here in doubt, provided these were purely for the purpose, even if manipulative, of allowing him to stay. The test remains whether he has a well founded fear of persecution if he returned. Such behaviour would no … Continue reading Danian v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 9 Nov 1999
The fact that an asylum seeker might not refrain from activities which would attract persecution if he was returned to his country of origin, was not fatal to his application for asylum. There is only one question to be asked: whether, if returned, he would face a serious risk of persecution. The option of internal … Continue reading Ahmed (Iftikhar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 8 Dec 1999
A fear of persecution which was justified only historically, was insufficient to justify an asylum claim. The applicant must show justification for contemporary fears. The applicant had been granted exceptional leave to remain in the UK, but wanted full refugee status because of the additional rights that would bring. In each case an applicant had … Continue reading Adan v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 6 Apr 1998
The Convention gave protection to an asylum seeker fearing persecution by non-state agents in his country of origin where that government was unable or unwilling to provide protection. France and Germany did not recognise this right, and therefore . .
A number of difficult questions as to the proper construction and application of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (as amended by the 1967 Protocol) Judges: Simon Brown LJ Citations: [1997] 1 WLR 1107, [1997] EWCA Civ 1007 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.141403
The applicant was an ethnic Kurd who claimed asylum, having fled Iraq. Held: To establish a claim, he must show that because of a well founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, he was outside his country and unable or, because of that fear, unwilling, to avail himself of the protection of that country. … Continue reading Gardi v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 24 May 2002
The defendants had been convicted of not having an immigration document when presenting themselves for interview. They had handed their passports to the ‘agents’ who had assisted their entry. Held: The jury should have been directed as to the defence of reasonable excuse and otherwise. The statute had to be read so as to comply … Continue reading Regina v Fraydon Navabi; Senait Tekie Embaye: CACD 11 Nov 2005
Whether a stateless person who is unable to return to the country of his former habitual residence is, by reason of those facts alone, a refugee within the meaning of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, as modified by the 1967 New York Protocol. The Tribunal found, and the Secretary of State … Continue reading Revenko v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 31 Jul 2000
A scheme had been introduced to arrange pre-entry clearance for visitors to the United Kingdom by posting of immigration officers in the Czech Republic. The claimants argued that the system was discriminatory, because Roma visitors were now subjected to a much more rigorous examination than others, and also that the arrangement put the respondent in … Continue reading European Roma Rights Centre and others v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and Another: CA 20 May 2003
US Board of Immigration Appeals – Held: ‘We find the well-established doctrine of ejusdem generis, meaning literally, ‘of the same kind,’ to be most helpful in construing the phrase ‘membership in a particular social group.’ That doctrine holds that general words used in an enumeration with specific words should be construed in a manner consistent … Continue reading In re Acosta: 1985
The appellant Iranian challenged refusal of his claim for asylum. He had been granted refugee status in Iraq and in Turkey by the United Nations commission, but on arrival in the UK, his asylum claim had been rejected on the basis of the credibility of his assertions. Held: The appeal failed. Those making such decisions … Continue reading IA (Iran) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department (Scotland): SC 29 Jan 2014
The asylum seeker was accused of complicity in war crimes in Sri Lanka. He had worked as an intelligence officer but his cover had been broken and he fled to the UK. It was said that he was excluded from protection as an asylum seeker. Held: The Home Secretary’s appeal failed. Article 28 is to … Continue reading JS (Sri Lanka), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 17 Mar 2010
The House of Lords were concerned with the correct test to be applied in determining whether asylum seekers are entitled to the status of refugee. That in turn gave rise to an issue, turning upon the proper interpretation of Article 1.A(2) of the Convention. Held: When deciding whether an asylum applicant’s fear of persecution was … Continue reading Regina v Home Secretary, ex parte Sivakumaran: HL 16 Dec 1987
Extra Division, Inner House – The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal rejecting his appeals. The latter decision dismissed the applicant’s appeal against a decision of the respondent, the Home . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
