(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
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
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 claimant was stopped when boarding a flight to Canada, having previously stopped in France and Italy. He bore a false Swedish passport, and intended to claim asylum in Canada. He now claimed the benefit of the article 31 (per Adimi), to defend a prosecution under the 1981 Act for using a false instrument. Held: … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Gjovalin Pepushi) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 11 May 2004
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 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
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
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
