The applicants contended that as children of Palestinian Arabs who were entitled to be treated as asylum applicants, they were to be treated on the same basis. The Immigration Appeal Tribunal had decided that they had to establish such entitlement themselves. Held: The entitlement was not ‘inherited’ but had to be established for the children … Continue reading El Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Daraz v Same, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, intervening: CA 26 Jul 2002
Issues under Article 1F of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (‘the Refugee Convention’). Judges: Lord Justice Richards Citations: [2009] EWCA Civ 226, [2009] 3 All ER 564 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.324649
The defendant appealed against his conviction in a case concerning the use of a false passport. The central issue was whether the appellant had a defence based upon the proposition that he was a refugee entitled to asylum in this country. He had been deported to Jamaica, but returned with a forged passport which was … Continue reading Evans, Regina v: CACD 23 Jan 2013
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
ECJ Opinion – (Principles Of Community Law) Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 – Transfer of asylum seekers to the Member State responsible for examining the asylum application – Obligation on the transferring Member State to exercise the right to assume responsibility for the examination itself under Article 3(2) of Regulation No 343/2003 – Compatibility of the … Continue reading NS v Secretary of State For The Home Department: ECJ 22 Sep 2011
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for asylum and protection on human rights grounds. He said that if returned to Afghanistan he would face a real risk of serious harm. Judges: Pill, Rimer, Black LJJ Citations: [2010] EWCA Civ 1407 Links: Bailii Statutes: Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), Immigration, … Continue reading Secretary of State for The Home Department v DD (Afghanistan): CA 10 Dec 2010
The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring him to recognise the respondent as a refugee and to grant permissions accordingly. His ddecision to order her return had been contrary to a finding of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. Held: The appeal succeeded. Stanley Burnton LJ said that he would hold: ‘that article 32 … Continue reading Secretary of State for The Home Department v ST (Eritrea): CA 9 Jun 2010
The claimants sought to maintain their claims for asylum. They had fled persecution, but before their claims for asylum were determined conditions in their home country changed so that they could no longer be said to have a well founded fear of persecution. Held: The decision on the grant required the fear to remain well … Continue reading Hoxha and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 10 Mar 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
When assessing the propriety of an order requiring an asylum seeker to be removed and returned to a third country, it was wrong to look at the processes which might be applied by that third country. The court should look at the outcome of the decision and the test laid down, namely whether that third … Continue reading Regina (Yogathas) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 9 Sep 2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Violation of Art. 5-1; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings‘In order to determine whether someone has been ‘deprived of his liberty’ within the meaning of Article 5, the … Continue reading Amuur v France: ECHR 25 Jun 1996
The applicant for asylum was a Tamil. He was persecuted. He claimed it was political. The possibility of drawing that inference was greater when legal mis-treatment was not expected to be followed by legal proceedings. Excessive or arbitrary punishment for political offences did not necessarily amount to persecution for a Convention reason, but it did … Continue reading Sivakumar v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 24 Jul 2001
When asking whether it was correct to certify the removal of an asylum seeker to a third country, in the light of a country’s compliance with the Convention, the issue should be approached in an intensely practical fashion. The question was not primarily whether the third country’s laws were compliant, but rather what was the … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Santia Yogathas v Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 25 May 2001
A refugee does not become a refugee because of recognition as such. He is recognised because he is a refugee so, for the purposes of Article 31.1 the term refugee includes someone who is only subsequently established as being a refugee, in other words a bona fide claimant. Citations: [1993] Imm AR 483 Statutes: Convention … Continue reading Khaboka v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 1993
The Refugee Convention had ‘indirectly’ been incorporated under English law. The court considered whether a person allowed entry by an immigration officer was lawfully here irrespective of other considerations. As to the case of Musis in the Bugdaycay case: ‘Each of the present applicants had only been granted temporary admission and they required, but had … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Singh: QBD 8 Jun 1987
Mr Musisi sought entry to the United Kingdom as a visitor from Kenya. When that application looked as though it might fail, he claimed political asylum as a refugee from Uganda. His application for asylum was refused on the basis that he had come from a safe third country, Kenya. This decision was challenged on … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Musisi: HL 1987
Federal Court of Australia – MIGRATION – refugees – application for protection visa – whether serious reasons for considering commission of serious non-political crime outside country of refuge – application of Art 1F(b) of Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees – meaning of ‘serious reasons for considering’. Judges: Weinberg J Citations: [2000] FCA 1889, … Continue reading Arquita v Minister for Immigration and Multi-cultural Affairs: 22 Dec 2000
The mother fled Pakistan and secured asylum here, proving a well founded fear of persecution if she returned. She had brought her son. The father applied for the child to be returned for the courts there to decide his future, saying he had been abducted. Held: To order the return of the child anticipating the … Continue reading In re H (a Minor) (Child abduction: Mother’s Asylum): FD 25 Jul 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
Judges: Pill, Arden, Black LJJ Citations: [2012] EWCA Civ 1145 Links: Bailii Statutes: UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.463709
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, signed in Geneva on 28 July 1951 – Articles 23 and 26 – Area of freedom, security and justice – Directive 2011/95/EU – Rules relating to the content of international protection – Subsidiary protection status – Article 29 – Social welfare … Continue reading Alo (Judgment): ECJ 1 Mar 2016
ECJ Directive 2004/83/EC – Minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees – Stateless person of Palestinian origin who has not sought protection or assistance from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) – Application for refugee status – … Continue reading Bolbol (Area Of Freedom, Security And Justice): ECJ 17 Jun 2010
1. The Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 provides greater protection than the minimum standards imposed by a literal interpretation) of Article 10(1)(d) of the Qualification Directive (Particular Social Group). Article 10 (d) should be interpreted by replacing the word ‘and’ between Article 10(1)(d)(i) and (ii) with the word ‘or’, creating an … Continue reading DH (Particular Social Group: Mental Health) Afghanistan: UTIAC 3 Jun 2020
The three asylum seeker appellants arrived in the United Kingdom at different times in possession of false passports. They were prosecuted for possession or use of false documents contrary to section 5, and for obtaining air services by deception under the Criminal Attempts Act. At the time, their applications to be accorded refugee status had … Continue reading Regina v Uxbridge Magistrates and Another ex parte Adimi; R v CPS ex parte Sorani; R v SSHD and Another ex parte Kaziu: Admn 29 Jul 1999
The Tribunal had confirmed the appellant’s refugee status, but the respondent had ordered nevertheless that she be returned. The judge’s order setting aside that decision had been overturned in the Court of Appeal. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The Convention set two standards of protection for refugees. Article 33 prevented the return of anyone to … Continue reading ST Eritrea, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 21 Mar 2012
The House considered the point of law: ‘If a defendant is charged with an offence not specified in section 31(3) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, to what extent is he entitled to rely on the protections afforded by article 31 of the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees?’ The … Continue reading Regina v Fregenet Asfaw: HL 21 May 2008
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 claimants sought to prevent their removal and return to their countries of origin saying that as practising homosexuals they would face discrimination and persecution. They appealed against a judgment saying that they could avoid persecution by adapting their behaviour on return. In both countries practising homosexuality would risk imprisonment and in Iran, execution. Held: … Continue reading HJ (Iran) v Secretary of State for The Home Department; HT (Cameroon) v Same: SC 7 Jul 2010
The court considered the claimants appeal against refusal of asylum and for his return to Palestine, against the case of MA which decided that denial of return to a stateless person to his country of former habitual residence did not of itself give . .
The applicant had claimed asylum on entry and was temporarily admitted. Though his claim for asylum was later refused, those admitted in this way were granted indefinite leave to remain. He had claimed and received benefits at first, but then these . .
The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that it had been an abuse of process and unlawful for the Secretary of State to have refused to grant to the Respondent refugee status and 5 years’ leave to remain in this country on the ground that he . .
The appellants had been refused refugee status on the ground that they were suspected of having been guilty of terrorist acts. They said that the definition of terrorism applied within the UK was wider than that in the Convention which contained the . .
Whether the respondent has a well-founded fear of being persecuted ‘for reasons of membership of a particular social group’: ‘The basis of the claim for asylum was that he was being persecuted by criminals while working as a security officer in a . .
References: [2000] FCA 1889, 106 FCR 46 Links: Austlii Coram: Weinberg J Federal Court of Australia – MIGRATION – refugees – application for protection visa – whether serious reasons for considering commission of serious non-political crime outside country of refuge – application of Art 1F(b) of Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees – meaning … Continue reading Arquita v Minister for Immigration and Multi-cultural Affairs; 22 Dec 2000
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
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
This appeal concerns the relationship of the 1980 Hague Convention (the ‘1980 HC’) to asylum law. The 1980 HC is an international agreement incorporated into UK law which enables the prompt return of a wrongfully abducted child to his or her country of habitual residence. (1) Does a child named as a dependent on a … Continue reading G v G: SC 19 Mar 2021
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
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 Court asked: ‘1(a) Is a person who is outside his country of origin and recognised as a refugee, and who has subsequent to that recognition taken on the nationality of the host country, still a refugee within the meaning of the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees?(b) If such a person does … Continue reading DL (DRC) v The Entry Clearance Officer, Pretoria: CA 18 Dec 2008
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
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
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
The applicant sought asylum. He had suffered persecution, and continued to suffer the effects of that persecution on his health. He appealed a refusal which was on the basis that the conditions which led to the persecution would not now apply. Held: The applicants had had well founded fears of persecution when they left Albania, … Continue reading Hoxha and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 14 Oct 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
ECHR Grand Chamber – Article 1 Jurisdiction of states Jurisdiction of Armenia as regards Nagorno-Karabakh and the adjacent occupied territories Article 8 Article 8-1 Respect for family life Respect for home Respect for private life Denial of access to homes to Azerbaijani citizens displaced in the context of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: violation Article 13 Effective … Continue reading Chiragov And Others v Armenia: ECHR 16 Jun 2015
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees – Article 31 – Third country national who has entered the territory of a Member State after passing through another Member State – Use of the services of human traffickers – Unauthorised entry and stay – … Continue reading Qurbani: ECJ 17 Jul 2014
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 applicants were asylum seekers who had been ordered to be returned to Germany, the country to which they had first escaped, for their asylum claims to be dealt with. They objected, asserting that Germany would not deal with their applications in a way which complied with the Convention. Held: Germany did apply the convention … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Thangarasa; Same Ex parte Yogathas: HL 17 Oct 2002
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 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
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 . .
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 . .
