Click the case name for better results:

Lekstaka, Regina (on the Application of) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another: Admn 18 Apr 2005

Collins J said: ‘one is entitled to see, whether in all the circumstances, this case falls within the spirit of the Rules or the policies, even if not within the letter.’ Judges: Collins J Citations: [2005] EWHC 745 (Admin) Links: Bailii Cited by: Dicta approved – SB (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home … Continue reading Lekstaka, Regina (on the Application of) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another: Admn 18 Apr 2005

Al-Sabah (Sheikh Mohammed Nasser) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal: CA 1992

The applicant, a Kuwaiti citizen of previous good character had been ordered to be deported after serving a sentence for drugs and dishonesty. He sought review of the IAT’s refusal of his appeal, arguing that Rule 162 of the 1983 rules required the Home Secretary to apply the same rules to both EC and non-EC … Continue reading Al-Sabah (Sheikh Mohammed Nasser) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal: CA 1992

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Alexander: HL 5 Jul 1982

The appellant had sought to enter the UK. She first showed an entry clearence certificate which had been obtained by deception. She then sought entry as a student. The officer refused, saying that he had no discretion in the matter. The plaintiff said that he did have a discretion, and that therefore the refusl was … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Alexander: HL 5 Jul 1982

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antonissen: ECJ 26 Feb 1991

ECJ The free movement of workers enshrined in Article 48 of the Treaty entails the right for nationals of Member States to move freely within the territory of the other Member States and to stay there for the purposes of seeking employment. The period of time for which the person seeking employment may stay may … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antonissen: ECJ 26 Feb 1991

Regina v Governor of Richmond Remand Centre, Ex Parte Asghar: QBD 1971

The Secretary of State had detained two persons who were awaiting removal with the object that they should testify in a pending criminal trial. Lord Parker J rejected the suggestion that the detention could be justified as reasonable in these circumstances, stating: ‘it does seem to me that while a reasonable time is contemplated between … Continue reading Regina v Governor of Richmond Remand Centre, Ex Parte Asghar: QBD 1971

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Saleem: QBD 11 Nov 1999

The rule which deemed an appellant to have received notice of the determination of his appeal two days after it was posted, irrespective of whether it in fact was received by him was ultra vires and unlawful. The effect of such a rule was draconian and could not be justified by reference to the Act … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Saleem: QBD 11 Nov 1999

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Anderson, Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Khatib-Shahidi: QBD 22 Mar 2000

There is no appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal against either a decision of an adjudicator to make or one to refuse to make a recommendation to the Secretary of State when he was himself refusing an appeal. Nor is such a decision subject to judicial review. This practice, unlike that on granting an appeal, … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Anderson, Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Khatib-Shahidi: QBD 22 Mar 2000

Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: HL 30 Apr 2008

The House considered whether the Secretary of State for Health acted lawfully in issuing guidance as to the employment of foreign doctors to employing bodies within the National Health Service in April 2006. Held: The secretary of state’s appeal failed. The fact that the guidance differentiated between NHS service and private medical care indicated that … Continue reading BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: HL 30 Apr 2008

BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: QBD 9 Feb 2007

The claimants said that changes to the Highy Skilled Migrant Programme were unfairly introduced, that they had effectively barred non-EU doctors from applying for first tier doctor appointments, and that the guidance could properly be derived only . .

Acts

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

Chung Chi Cheung v The King: PC 2 Dec 1938

Hong Kong. Held: The applicant could not invoke any right under the rule of international law which placed upon a state a duty to receive its own national, because that rule was inconsistent with the domestic law. In modern times the idea of even a Government ship being a ‘floating island,’ belonging to and retaining … Continue reading Chung Chi Cheung v The King: PC 2 Dec 1938

Mongoto v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 19 May 2005

Laws LJ referred to the argument that the applicant could derive ‘analogical support’ from the Concession, even though it did not in terms apply to him as a ‘spurious’ argument. Judges: Ward, Laws, Smith LJJ Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 751 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Patel and Others v Secretary … Continue reading Mongoto v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 19 May 2005

Khadir, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Jun 2005

The applicant who had entered England hidden in a lorry, claimed asylum, and had his claim rejected. It was said that as an Iraqi Kurd, he would be safe in the Kurdish area of Iraq. No safe means had been found of ensuring his return over some four years, and there was no immediate prospect … Continue reading Khadir, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Jun 2005

Azam and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: HL 11 Jun 1973

Immigration – Detention – Illegal entrant – Illegal entrant not given leave to enter or remain in United Kingdom – Detention pending directions for removal – Persons entering United Kingdom and present there in breach of immigration laws – Commonwealth immigrant – Immigrant entering United Kingdom clandestinely in breach of laws relating to Commonwealth immigrants … Continue reading Azam and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: HL 11 Jun 1973

Waddington v Miah: HL 1 May 1974

HL Immigration – Statute controlling immigration – Retrospective operation – Penal provisions – Illegal entry – Possession of false passport – Whether statute creating offences in respect of acts performed before it came into force – Immigration Act 1971, ss 24(1)(a), 26(1)(d). Citations: [1974] UKHL 6, 138 JP 497, 59 Cr App Rep 149, [1974] … Continue reading Waddington v Miah: HL 1 May 1974

Hani El Sayed Sabaei Youssef v The Home Office: QBD 30 Jul 2004

The claimant alleged false imprisonment after his asylum application. Held: The court will assess the legality of a continued detention on an objective basis; but review is not restricted to a review of the Secretary of State’s decision on Wednesbury grounds. Judges: Field, The Honourable Mr Justice Field Citations: [2004] EWHC 1884 (QB) Links: Bailii … Continue reading Hani El Sayed Sabaei Youssef v The Home Office: QBD 30 Jul 2004

V v Addey and Stanhope School: CA 30 Jul 2004

The respondent resisted a claim of unfair dismissal and race discrimination on the basis that the employment contract was illegal since the claimant was an immigrant and unable to work without a work permit. Held: The Court of Appeal upheld a defence of illegality to a teacher’s complaint against a school of unlawful discrimination by … Continue reading V v Addey and Stanhope School: CA 30 Jul 2004

Nadarajah and Amirhanathan v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 8 Dec 2003

The Secretary of State’s published policy was that, if legal proceedings were initiated, removal would not be treated as imminent even if it otherwise was. The Secretary of State also had an unpublished policy, namely that information that proceedings were about to be initiated would be disregarded, however credible that information might be. Held: The … Continue reading Nadarajah and Amirhanathan v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 8 Dec 2003

Ekinci, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jun 2003

The appellant, a Turkish citizen entered illegally and claimed asylum. He falsely said he had not sought asylum in another EC country. He had lived in Germany for eight years, and had twice unsuccessfully claimed asylum. Shortly after arrangements were made for his removal to Germany, he married a woman whom he had known in … Continue reading Ekinci, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jun 2003

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay: HL 19 Feb 1986

Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without investigation. Held: A claim to refugee status was not an exception to the ban on appeals … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay: HL 19 Feb 1986

Farrakhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Apr 2002

The applicant sought admission to the UK. In the past he had made utterances which were capable of being racist. He claimed to have recanted, and had given undertakings as to his behaviour. At first instance it was held that the Home Secretary had failed to demonstrate an objective reason for refusing admission. It was … Continue reading Farrakhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Apr 2002

Regina (Boafo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 4 Feb 2002

The applicant had married an English national. The marriage ended in divorce. She applied for indefinite leave to stay. Incorrect information from a Government department led to her application being dismissed. The adjudicator granted her application, but the Secretary of State, without appealing the adjudicator’s order, reconsidered and refused the application. Held: The finding of … Continue reading Regina (Boafo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 4 Feb 2002

Gedi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 9 Oct 2015

Application for Judicial Review challenging the lawfulness of bail conditions (a curfew monitored by electronic tagging) imposed by the defendant during deportation proceedings under section 32(5) of the 2007 Act. Judges: Edis J Citations: [2015] EWHC 2786 (Admin), [2015] WLR(D) 405 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: UK Borders Act 2007 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: … Continue reading Gedi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 9 Oct 2015

Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: SC 12 Feb 2020

Claim for damages for false imprisonment brought in judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of a curfew imposed upon the claimant, purportedly under paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971. Held: The Court of Appeal in Austin and in Walker were right to say that there could be imprisonment at common law … Continue reading Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: SC 12 Feb 2020

Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and others: HL 31 Oct 2007

The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that a non-derogating control order was unlawful in that, in restricting the subject to an 18 hour curfew and otherwise severely limiting his social contacts, the order amounted to such a deprivation of liberty as to be unlawful. Held: The appeal failed. When looking at the lawfulness of … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and others: HL 31 Oct 2007

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

Meering v Grahame-White Aviation Co Ltd: CA 1919

An unconscious or drugged person may be detained. For the tort of false imprisonment there must be shown a complete restriction in fact on the plaintiff’s freedom to move: ‘any restraint within defined bounds which is a restraint in fact may be an imprisonment.’ The court distinguished between restraint upon the plaintiff’s liberty which is … Continue reading Meering v Grahame-White Aviation Co Ltd: CA 1919

Gedi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 17 May 2016

The court considered the power of the Secretary of State for the Home Department and her immigration officials to impose conditions of curfew and electronic monitoring on those who have been released from immigration detention pending the conclusion of deportation proceedings. Held: Paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the 1971 Act did not empower the … Continue reading Gedi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 17 May 2016

Robertson v The Balmain New Ferry Company Ltd: PC 10 Dec 1909

High Court of Australia – The Plaintiff paid a penny on entering the wharf to stay there till the boat should start and then be taken by the boat to the other side. The Defendants were admittedly always ready and willing to carry out their part of this contract. Then the Plaintiff changed his mind, … Continue reading Robertson v The Balmain New Ferry Company Ltd: PC 10 Dec 1909

Syed Mahamad Yusuf-ud-Din v Secretary of State for India: 1903

For the tort of false imprisonment to be committed, the deprivation of liberty must be actual, rather than potential: ‘Nothing short of actual detention and complete loss of freedom would support an action for false imprisonment.’ Judges: Lord Macnaghten Citations: (1903) 19 TLR 496, (1903) 30 Ind App 154 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Approved … Continue reading Syed Mahamad Yusuf-ud-Din v Secretary of State for India: 1903

HL v United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Sep 2002

(Admissibility) Whether a detention amounts to a deprivation of liberty depends upon all the facts and circumstances of the particular case Citations: [2002] ECHR 850, 45508/99, [2004] 40 EHRR 761 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: At HL – In Re L (By His Next Friend GE); Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS … Continue reading HL v United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Sep 2002

Walker v The Commissioner of The Police of The Metropolis: CA 1 Jul 2014

The minimal extent of a person’s detention by a police officer who was not exercising the power of arrest would not prevent his detention from being unlawful and amounting to false imprisonment. It was held to be false imprisonment for a police officer to stand in the front doorway of a house so as to … Continue reading Walker v The Commissioner of The Police of The Metropolis: CA 1 Jul 2014

Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 15 Oct 2007

The claimants appealed dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment and unlawful detention by the respondent in his policing of a demonstration. They had been held within a police cordon in the streets for several hours to prevent the spread of violence. One claimant had been simply there on business. Held: The appeal failed. In … Continue reading Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 15 Oct 2007

In Re L (By His Next Friend GE); Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, Ex Parte L: HL 25 Jun 1998

The applicant was an adult autistic, unable to consent to medical treatment. Treatment was provided at a day centre. He had been detained informally under the Act and against the wishes of his carers, but the Court of Appeal decided he should have been formally detained. Held: The appeal succeeded. His detention had not been … Continue reading In Re L (By His Next Friend GE); Regina v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust, Ex Parte L: HL 25 Jun 1998

McFadzean and Others v Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union and Others: 13 Dec 2007

The Union set a picket round a camp set up by anti-logging protesters to prevent the protesters getting out. The protesters could have asked the police to escort them out, but that did not mean that they were not imprisoned until they did so. But the protesters could also have escaped at any time along … Continue reading McFadzean and Others v Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union and Others: 13 Dec 2007

Regina (Linda Boafo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 6 Feb 2001

The applicant had appealed a refusal to grant her permanent residence. The adjudicator granted her appeal, but the Home Secretary had declined on the bass that the adjudicator’s decision had not been accompanied by directions. Held: The decision was binding on the Secretary of State. Whilst there are some circumstances which might allow a re-opening … Continue reading Regina (Linda Boafo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 6 Feb 2001

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Saadi, Maged, Osman, Mohammed: CA 19 Oct 2001

The Secretary appealed against a decision that the detention of certain asylum applicants was unlawful. The detention was for a limited period, but he had put forward no reason for the detentions of the individuals. Held: The Act authorised detention up to the point where a decision was made. The Act empowered detention not for … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v Saadi, Maged, Osman, Mohammed: CA 19 Oct 2001

Farrakhan v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 1 Oct 2001

The applicant challenged the Home Secretary’s decision to exclude him from the UK, on the grounds that his presence would exacerbate tensions between the Jewish and Muslim communities. A balance is to be found between freedom of speech and the need for public order. He agreed to sign an undertaking in the form requested by … Continue reading Farrakhan v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 1 Oct 2001

Regina (Yaser Mahmood) v Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 9 Aug 2001

The Home Secretary had served notice that the applicant was an illegal immigrant, and liable to deportation. An order had been made for the cross examination of the applicant. He had come to England to study, but soon dropped his immediate plans. He left and re-entered claiming an intention to start an alternative course. He … Continue reading Regina (Yaser Mahmood) v Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 9 Aug 2001

Regina (on the application of Baram etc) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 7 Sep 2001

Asylum seekers had been detained on arrival in the UK, and then released. They challenged the propriety of the detention. The policy was that detention was appropriate where entry had been achieved through breach of immigration control, and did not depend upon whether the detainee might abscond. It appeared that the system worked for the … Continue reading Regina (on the application of Baram etc) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 7 Sep 2001

Samaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jul 2001

Two foreign nationals with leave to remain in this country committed serious crimes. The Secretary of State ordered their deportation. Held: Where the deportation of a foreigner following a conviction here, would conflict with his human rights, the court had to assess whether the, first, the objective could be achieved by some alternative, less interfering, … Continue reading Samaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jul 2001

X v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 7 Dec 2000

The applicant applied for asylum, but suffered from schizophrenia. He had been refused entry and detained, and then his detention was transferred to a mental hospital by order of the Home Secretary, with a view to his return for treatment in Malta. The applicant alleged that the Secretary had no power to so order without … Continue reading X v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 7 Dec 2000

B v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 18 May 2000

The claimant had come to England as a child from Italy. As an adult, he was convicted of a sexual assault against his daughter, and after release from his prison sentence of five years, he now appealed against a deportation order, saying that the respondent had failed to take account of the length of time … Continue reading B v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 18 May 2000

Dupovac v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 21 Jan 2000

The court was asked whether the words ‘by reason of the appellant leaving the United Kingdom’ in section 33(4) Immigration Act 1971, as amended by paragraph 4(2) of schedule 2 to the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996, mean that leaving the United Kingdom is merely permissive or presumptive of abandonment of an appeal, or whether … Continue reading Dupovac v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 21 Jan 2000

Ali, Regina v: CACD 3 Feb 2015

Appeal against conviction for assisting unlawful immigration. Judges: Raffety LJ, Foskett J, Carey HHJ Citations: [2015] EWCA Crim 43 Links: Bailii Statutes: Immigration Act 1971 25 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Crime Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.542249

Zulfiqar (‘Foreign Criminal’ : British Citizen) Pakistan: UTIAC 11 Sep 2020

The meaning of ‘foreign criminal’ is not consistent over the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and the UK Borders Act 2007. Section 32 of the 2007 Act creates a designated class of offender that is a foreign criminal and establishes the consequences of such designation. That is, for the purposes of section 3(5)(a) of … Continue reading Zulfiqar (‘Foreign Criminal’ : British Citizen) Pakistan: UTIAC 11 Sep 2020

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Cengiz Doldur: Admn 26 Jun 1997

The applicant sought judicial review of the immigration officer’s finding that he was an illegal immigrant within the section. He had failed to declare that after obtaining temporary permission to enter, he had got married. It was not suggested that he had acted with positive deceit but had failed to disclose the marriage. Held: The … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Cengiz Doldur: Admn 26 Jun 1997

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Yousaf Same v Same, Ex parte Jamil: CA 11 Jul 2000

A failure to appear at an earlier appeal which was through no fault of the appellant, should not be used by the Secretary as an excuse to defeat an appeal under the section. The Secretary of State should not treat the section as a safety net or fall back. It was in fact a secondary … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Yousaf Same v Same, Ex parte Jamil: CA 11 Jul 2000

Murat Kaya v Haringey London Borough Council and Another: CA 14 Jun 2001

The grant of temporary admission to the UK pending an decision on his asylum status, did not create a full ‘lawful presence’ in the UK. A person seeking to qualify for housing assistance had to be lawfully present within the UK, and temporary admission did not create a sufficient status by virtue of section 11. … Continue reading Murat Kaya v Haringey London Borough Council and Another: CA 14 Jun 2001

B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 8 Feb 2018

Bail conditions only after detention B had been held under immigration detention, but released by SIAC, purportedly in conditional bail, after they found there was no realistic prospect of his deportation because he had not disclosed his true identity. The court was asked ‘whether there exists a power under the 1971 Act to grant immigration … Continue reading B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 8 Feb 2018

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Singh: QBD 8 Jun 1987

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

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Owalabi: QBD 3 Jan 1996

The Home Secretary may evaluate fresh material himself under the section, without always referring the case back to the adjudicator. Citations: Times 03-Jan-1996 Statutes: Immigration Act 1971 21 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Adopted – Regina v Home Secretary, Ex parte Bellow 25-May-1995 . . Adopted – Regina v Home Secretary, Ex parte Khaldoon 8-Nov-1995 … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Owalabi: QBD 3 Jan 1996

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ex parte Chahal: QBD 5 Apr 1993

The Home Secretary need not consider any risk of torture as an issue separate from that of persecution, when considering making an order for deportation. Citations: Ind Summary 05-Apr-1993 Statutes: Immigration Act 1971 3(5)(b) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Chahal … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ex parte Chahal: QBD 5 Apr 1993

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Xuereb: QBD 14 Jun 2000

The fact that an alien was detained under the Mental Health Acts did not mean that he could not be ordered to be removed and returned to his own country. The power given to the Secretary of State was discretionary, and though the treatment he might receive was of a lower standard, it was not … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Xuereb: QBD 14 Jun 2000

Kola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 28 Nov 2007

The claimant said that the 1987 Regulations were invalid, in making invalid any claim for benefits by an asylum seeker who had not made his application exactly upon entry to the UK. Held: The appeals were allowed. Section 11 of the 1971 Act is a highly technical provision which for the purposes of immigration control … Continue reading Kola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 28 Nov 2007

Teame v Aberash and Others; Regina v Secretary of State for Home Dept ex parte Teame: CA 8 Apr 1994

Home Secretary may order deportation of a child’s guardian despite a pending appeal for residence order in favour of the applicant. Such a deportation would not be a contempt of court. Citations: Ind Summary 02-May-1994, Times 08-Apr-1994 Statutes: Immigration Act 1971 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration, Children Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.89759

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte X: CA 9 Jan 2001

An asylum seeker had come to be detained under the Mental Health Act. The Home Secretary, having refused the asylum application, ordered him to be repatriated. Held: Though the Secretary of State could only exercise his powers of removal under section 86 of the MHA if it appeared to him to be in the patient’s … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte X: CA 9 Jan 2001

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte X: CA 22 Feb 2001

The applicant had entered the UK without leave, and then been detained for mental illness. The Secretary ordered him to be removed. He claimed that there was no power to remove him whilst the detention order was current, and that the order infringed his human rights. Held: The later Act had not revoked the earlier, … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte X: CA 22 Feb 2001

Regina v Kishietine: CACD 29 Nov 2004

The defendant had been convicted of providing false information to the immigration authorities when applying for asylum. She appealed her sentence of nine months imprisonment. Held: She had been raped and beaten by soldiers in her own country and fled to England. She only claimed asylum three months after arriving, but said that she had … Continue reading Regina v Kishietine: CACD 29 Nov 2004

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Rajinder Kaur: CA 1987

The court considered a provision requiring refusal of leave to enter if there was no entry clearance. Held: Such a mandatory rule was intra vires, the Secretary of State retaining a discretion outside the 1971 Act. Glidewell LJ said: ‘immigration was formerly covered by the royal prerogative and it was a matter which lay entirely … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Rajinder Kaur: CA 1987

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Malhi: CA 1990

Parliament would not have intended to give an adjudicator powers to review the decisions of the respondent which were co-extensive with those of a court in a judicial review since this would simply cause duplication. On the true construction of section 5(1) an adjucicator hearing an appeal under section 15 of the Act of 1971 … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Malhi: CA 1990