The several applicants challenged the implementation of the section, which required an asylum seeker to make his application at the very first opportunity on arriving in the UK, and denied all benefit and support to those who did not do so. A form was completed by the officer, and followed strictly. They complained that the scheme had been introduced in a way which was unfair, and that it was unfair in not allowing any appeal.
Held: The system did not allow the collection of full information about the circumstances of the arrival, and did not give to the applicant a chance to respond to any doubts raised by the answers. The system provided no proper appeal, and the readiness of the respondent to listen to any further information was not a sufficient response.
Judges:
Collins J
Citations:
Times 20-Feb-2003, [2003] EWHC 195 (Admin), Gazette 19-Apr-2003, [2003] 3 WLR 365
Links:
Statutes:
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 55
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – Regina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Mar-2003
The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law.
Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Mar-2003
The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law.
Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration, Human Rights
Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.179541