The claimant sought a declaration that the obligation on the respondent to continue to support the child of an asylum seeker when the parent had ceased to be entitled to support, continued despite the 2002 Act. Held: The statute was quite clear. The obligation to provide support for the child under the 1999 Act continued … Continue reading B, Regina (on the Application of) v The Asylum Support Adjudicator and Another: Admn 19 Sep 2005
An appeal by the Home Secretary against a ruling that he had to use the same prescribed form as would be used by the asylum seeker. The use of a letter which omitted a substantial and important declaration was invalid. Lord Woolf MR made plain the court’s general reluctance to hold that the effect of … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex Parte Jeyeanthan: Admn 3 Apr 1998
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
The BBC wished to interview the prisoner who had been detained pending extradition to the US since 2004, and now challenged decision to refuse the interview. Held: The claim succeeded. The decision was quashed and must be retaken. If ever any case justified exceptional treatment, this was one. He had been held without trial for … Continue reading British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Ahmad: Admn 11 Jan 2012
An MOD ban on employing homosexuals was not Wednesbury unreasonable, even though it might be out of date. Pannick (counsel for the applicant, approved): ‘The court may not interfere with the exercise of an administrative discretion on substantive grounds save where the court is satisfied that the decision is unreasonable in the sense that it … Continue reading Regina v Ministry of Defence Ex Parte Smith and Others: QBD 7 Jun 1995
Applications were made by foreign nationals, residing unlawfully in the UK, for leave to remain as the partners of British citizens with whom they had formed relationships during their unlawful residence, relying primarily on the duty imposed on the Secretary of State by the 1998 Act to act compatibly with the right to respect for … Continue reading Agyarko and Ikuga, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 22 Feb 2017
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
Whilst an asylum claim remained outstanding it was no possible for the Secretary of State to issue a deportation order after a decision to issue a deportation order. No requirement to leave could be imposed until the determination of the claim. Citations: Times 06-Jan-1999 Statutes: Asylum and Immigration Act 1993 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex P Sabusi: CA 6 Jan 1999
The Immigration Appeal Tribunal does not have discretion, whether implied or otherwise, to admit new or further evidence without notice having first been given. The Rules explicitly required advance notice to be given, and nor was it proper for the tribunal itself to introduce evidence. The absence of a rule against such admission of evidence … Continue reading Macharia v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 25 Nov 1999
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
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 respondent introduced rules imposing fixed and penalties on HGV drivers coming into the UK who were found to have stowaway illegal entrants. The operators sought judicial review. Held: The penalty was in the character of a criminal penalty, not a civil one as proposed by the Secretary of State. The opportunities to challenge the … Continue reading International Transport Roth GmbH and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 5 Dec 2001
A renewed application brought out of time for permission to seek judicial review of decisions of the Secretary of State 1) to decline to treat further material put before him in the case as a fresh claim to asylum and 2) to decline to refer the applicant’s case to a special adjudicator. Citations:  EWCA … Continue reading Regina and Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Manneh: CA 21 Jul 1999
Where the Immigration Appeal Tribunal dealt with an appeal by remitting the case back to a special adjudicator for a rehearing, it had concluded the appeal, and it did not thereby delegate to the adjudicator its own function of deciding the appeal. There was no distinction to be made between procedural and substantive remittals. Remittal … Continue reading Regina (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal: QBD 12 Jun 2001
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
When conducting an appeal from an administrative decision-maker, to what extent, if any, is a tribunal entitled to take account of matters that were not relied upon by the original decision-maker? Judges: McFarlane, Sharp LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 1473 Links: Bailii Statutes: Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 05 … Continue reading Visa Joy Ltd and Another v Office of The Immigration Services Commissioner: CA 5 Oct 2017
The applicant sought assistance from the local authority. He suffered from spinal myeloma, was destitute and an asylum seeker. Held: Although the Act had withdrawn the obligation to provide assistance for many asylum seekers, those who were infirm and whose infirmity was not a consequence of their destitution, had not been excluded. Only able bodied … Continue reading Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service: HL 17 Oct 2002
Judges: Sir Anthony May P, Sullivan, Gross LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 671,  1 WLR 765,  ACD 74 Links: Bailii Statutes: Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 4 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration, Benefits Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.443631
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011
1. Schedule 1, paragraph 1 (d) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/1547) amended the definition of EEA national to exclude those who are also British Citizens, but that change was subject to the transitional provisions set out in Schedule 3 of those regulations. Similar provisions were added to the Immigration … Continue reading Tm (Eea Nationals – Meaning; Ni Practitioners : Zimbabwe): UTIAC 14 Mar 2017
Three conjoined claims for judicial review challenging decisions by the Secretary of State setting the level of weekly support payments to asylum seekers pursuant to sections 95 to 98 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 Flaux J  EWHC 2639 (Admin) Bailii England and Wales Benefits, Immigration Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570547
Challenge to arrangements made for the housing of asylum seekers.  EWHC 1781 (Admin) Bailii e Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 Immigration, Housing Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.567396
The claimants challenged the 2004 Order which prevented their return to their homes on the Chagos Islands. The islanders had been taken off the island to leave it for use as a US airbase. In 2004, the island was no longer needed, and payment had been made (ineffectively) to assist the dispossessed islanders, but an … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2): HL 22 Oct 2008
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
The defendants had been convicted and sentenced for offences which under the 2003 Act would mean that they stayed permanently on the Sex Offenders’ register without possibility of a review. The Secretary of State appealed aganst a finding that the absence of a review was incompatible with their article 8 rights. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading F and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 21 Apr 2010
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations. Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the executive without parliamentary scrutiny by the use of Orders in Council. Statutory provision for counter-terrorism was in … Continue reading HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others: SC 27 Jan 2010
The Attorney General appealed against a decision for the release under the Act and Regulations of letters from HRH The Prince of Wales to various ministers and government departments. Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The A-G had not been free to rely upon section 53 to issue a certificate avoiding the requirement to disclose the … Continue reading Evans and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Attorney General: SC 26 Mar 2015
The claimants, in the US awaiting execution for murders, challenged the permitting by the defendant for export of the chemical Sodium Thipental which would be used for their execution. The respondent said that its use in general anaesthesia practice meant that it was not subject to control. The claimants said that the export was a … Continue reading Zagorski and Baze, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Others: Admn 29 Nov 2010
Operation of Part II of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 [‘the Act’], which provides for carriers who are found with clandestine entrants on board their vehicles to be liable to civil penalties. The facts of each case differ slightly but are in many respects routine and typical. In each case the appellants appealed to … Continue reading Link Spolka ZOO and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 2 Dec 2021
The claimants had applied for asylum, being Tamils from Sri Lanka. The applications had been rejected, and they sought to challenge the decisions to return them as a breach of their human rights. The new Act and transitional provisions created a new right of appeal, but the applicants fell outside the policy which added certain … Continue reading Kariharan and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 5 Dec 2001
Each appellant had been convicted upon their admission on legal advice of attempting to rely upon a false travel document to secure entry to the UK as a refugee. In each case a defence may have been available under section 31 of the 19 Act. Leveson, Fulford LJJ, Spencer J  EWCA Crim 1372,  … Continue reading Mateta and Others, Regina v: CACD 30 Jul 2013
The Home Secretary’s statement that he had no intention to seek the removal from this country of an asylum seeker did not operate to remove his right to persist with an appeal against refusal of refugee status. In the light of the Sad case, the appeal must be allowed to go ahead. The asylum claimant … Continue reading Regina on the Application of the Secretary of State for the Home Department v Immigration Appeal Tribunal; Regina on the Application of Hwez v Secretary of State for the Home Department and an Adjudicator: Admn 19 Dec 2001
Housing Review Standard – EU rules still applied The claimants challenged their housing as asylum seekers and victims of torture in former army barracks, saying that they were substandard. The Court was asked as to the correct method of review of adequacy after leaving the EU. Held: The claim succeeded. Linden J  EWHC 1489 … Continue reading NB and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 3 Jun 2021
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 applicant children had been detained in immigration camps in Australia. They escaped and sought refuge in the British High Commission in Melbourne and claimed diplomatic asylum. They claimed in damages after being returned to the authorities in Australia. Held: Any threat to their safety was not sufficient to justify not returning them to the … Continue reading Regina on the Application of B and others v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office: CA 18 Oct 2004
In order to prevent marriages of convenience in the UK the Secretary of State introduced a scheme under which certain persons subject to immigration control required her written permission to marry and would not receive it unless they were present in the UK pursuant to a grant of leave for more than six months of … Continue reading Baiai and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 30 Jul 2008
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right to a fair trial. The right not to give evidence … Continue reading Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown: PC 5 Dec 2000
The claimants said it would be wrong to return them to Zimbabwe where they would be able to evade persecution only by pretending to a loyalty to, and enthusiasm for the current regime. Held: The Secretary of State’s appeals failed. The HJ principle applied. It was wrong to require someone with no political beliefs to … Continue reading RT (Zimbabwe) and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 25 Jul 2012
Anonymised Party to Proceedings The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported exercise) of a common law power. The court also gave directions … Continue reading A v British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland): SC 8 May 2014
The claimant challenged to the power of the Secretary of State to set a tariff where the sentence was imposed pursuant to section 53(1). The setting of the tariff was found to be a sentencing exercise which failed to comply with Article 6(1) of the European Convention in that the decision maker was the Secretary … Continue reading V v The United Kingdom; T v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 1999
The claimant said he had been assaulted by Iraqi police and contractors in Baghdad Airport whilst he was being forcibly returned there, and that the defendant had responsibility. He complained that about the failure of the IPCC to investigate his complaints. Held: The Regulations specifically excluded operations under Part 8 of the 1999 Act, and … Continue reading Salimi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: Admn 1 Jul 2011
The appellant, a Palestinian, challenged the involvement of Lady Cosgrove as a judge in her case, saying that Lady Cosgrove’s involvement as a jew in pro-Jewish lobby organisations meant that there was an appearance of bias. The applicant had sought asylum, saying that she had fled Palestine after taking legal action against the president of … Continue reading Helow v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: HL 22 Oct 2008
The two applicants had been detained by the armed forces in Iraq suspected of murder. They sought release before being transferred to the civilian authorities for trial saying that the trials would not be fair. The respondent denied that the applicants were within the jurisdiction of the court for this purpose, but merely being held … Continue reading Al-Saadoon and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: Admn 19 Dec 2008
ECJ Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) – Restrictive measures taken against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban – United Nations Security Council Resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations Implementation in the Community Common Position 2002/402/CFSP Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 ‘ … Continue reading Kadi v Council and Commission (Common Foreign and Security Policy): ECJ 16 Jan 2008
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2. Held: The SSD’s appeal succeeded. ‘jurisdiction’ within the meaning of Article … Continue reading Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010
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
Bias may not be intentional The applicant claimed that he had been denied appointment to a job with London Regional Transport because he had brought a number of previous race discrimination claims against it or associated companies. An industrial tribunal had upheld his claim of victimisation contrary to section 2(1) of the 1976 Act, finding … Continue reading Swiggs and others v Nagarajan: HL 15 Jul 1999
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be unlawful and leave the authority unable to meet … Continue reading Porter and Weeks v Magill: HL 13 Dec 2001
The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit the maximum amount of rent in the proper exercise of that discretionary power. The Act as a … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited: HL 7 Dec 2000
An undisclosed principal will not be permitted to claim to be party to a contract if this is contrary to the terms of the contract itself. Thus the provision in the standard form B contract of the London Metal Exchange ‘this contract is made between ourselves and yourselves as principals, we alone being liable to … Continue reading JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry: HL 1989
The court was asked as to the respective duties of the Secretary of State and the First-tier Tribunal, on an appeal against refusal of an application to vary leave to enter or remain under the Immigration Act 1971, and more particularly as to the . .
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 . .
(Interim Judgment) The respondent asylum seekers had been rescued in the Mediterranean and taken to an RAF base in Akrotiri on Cyprus, a sovereign base area. The court was now asked whether they were entitled, or should be permitted, to be resettled . .
Parties challenged the rule allowing the respondent to deny the right to enter or remain here to non EU citizens marrying a person settled and present here where either party was under the age of 21. The aim of the rule was to deter forced . .
Whether an asylum applicant had a well founded fear of persecution if he returned home, is always a question of fact and degree, and could not be made a question of law. Even so where there was a clear risk of repeated rather than single beatings if . .
The three Tamil applicants had left the area of Sri Lanka controlled by the Tamil Tigers and gone to live in Colombo. It was asserted that in Colombo they had a well-founded fear of persecution because they were young male Tamils and were therefore . .
The claimant challenged the refusal of a right to appeal against the decision refusing hs asylum appeal. He had failed to attend two hearings. The respondent gave his certificate under section 73 that in his opinion the only purpose of the appeal . .
The applicant had failed to comply with the Rules in not using the form prescribed for appliying for leave to appeal against a special adjudicator’s decision to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. The application, by letter, included all the relevant . .
The claimant had been detained at 11.25pm. His detention was not reviewed by an inspector until 7.45am the next morning, although it had been considered in the interim at 1.45am by an officer of junior rank. The plaintiff sued for unlawful . .
The claimant had sought support which had been refused by the Home Secretary on the basis that he was no longer an asylum seeker. The claimant sought judicial review of the refusal of his appeal by the Chief Asylum Support adjudicator. The Home . .
Where an Immigration Appeal Tribunal heard a case and the judgment would depend upon an assessment of the applicant as to his credibility, a delay of three months between the hearing and the delivery of the judgment was too long. The impression made . .
The claimant sought judicial review of the Defendant’s failure to assess her son’s needs for the purposes of providing accommodation and support under section 17 of the 1989 Act. While the case is specific to its particular facts, it raises the . .
The Asylum Support adjudicators had allowed appeals by the asylum failed seekers, and had awarded them support. The Secretary of State now appealed. The failed asylum seekers had been unable to leave the country and having been refused support were . .
The court considered the relationship between section 10 of the 1999 Act, and the appeal provisions in sections 82 and 92 of the 2002 Act and the extent to which, if any, a decision under section 10 of the 1999 Act could be challenged by judicial . .
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 . .
The appellate sought judicial review to challenge an order for his return to Albania. He said that he would be subject to persecution from communist sympathizers, and his life was at risk for a blood feud. Adjudicators had variously accepted and . .
Where a notice of liability was served on a transport operator with regard to his responsibility for transporting illegal immigrants into the country, and he wished to challenge it, the proper approach was to allow the notice to expire, and then to . .
The appellant had – in a fictitious identity that was not that of another, real, person – claimed and been granted asylum, indefinite leave to remain and British citizenship. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions accepted that the appellant . .
The claimant wished to assert that, during his removal from the UK to Iraq, he had been assaulted by the British escorts. . .
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
Can a person who would otherwise be a ‘person subject to immigration control’ under Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, s 115(9) rely on the provisions of SI 2000/636 which exempt a member of a family of a national of a state which is a party to the . .
An asylum seeker who was found to be destitute and had failed in his application was entitled to restricted support under the section. The respondent implemented a policy restricting the restriction on the use of the power to those who had some . .
There is a right of appeal against removal directions under section 65 of the 1999 Act on the ground that removal would be in breach of a person’s human rights. Auld LJ was not impressed by an argument that a restrictive interpretation was necessary . .
Each defendant appealed saying that being themselves the victims of people trafficking, the prosecutions had failed to take into account its obligations under the Convention.
Held: Prosecutors had ‘a three-stage exercise of judgment. The first . .
The court was asked upon whom falls the financial burden of providing accommodation to an eighteen year old asylum seeker who is also a ‘former relevant child’, to the extent that his welfare requires it, where the asylum seeker is not in education . .
The claimants challenge the decision of the Home Secretary to offer the first claimant support in the form of accommodation and subsequently vouchers to purchase food and essential toiletries. The first claimant declined the offer because it would . .
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .
The defendants faced charges under the two Acts. They raised as a preliminary issue whether it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the property being converted was in fact the proceeds, in the case of the 1994 Act, of drug trafficking and, in . .
IAT ‘This case is one of the first to raise issues under section 65 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. It requires the Tribunal to examine in particular certain aspects of the protection afforded by article . .
Challenge to rules requiring certain minimum levels of income (Minimum Income Requirement – MIR) for allowing entry for non-EEA spouse.
Held: The challenges udder the Human Rights Act to the Rules themselves failed. Nor did any separate issue . .
The claimant, a failed asylum seeker, sought judicial review of the refusal to him of accomodation . .
A Brazilian mother came to the Netherlands in 1994 and set up home with a Dutch national but not applying for a residence permit. In 1996 they had a daughter who became a Dutch national. In 1997 they split up and the daughter remained with her . .
The asylum seeker had sought support from the Secretary of State. That assistance had been granted subject to a condition that she live where directed. She sought to appeal.
Held: There was no right of appeal against the condition. The . .
The defendant had had responsibility to investigate and if necessary prosecute a company suspected of serious offences of bribery and corruption in the conduct of contract negotiations. The investigation had been stopped, alledgedly at the . .
Of two brothers, one sought to remain here to protect the other (a refugee settled here) from the consequences of his florid schizophrenia.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The brother settled here had brought contingent separate proceedings in . .
The claimants were dependants of Iraqi nationals killed in Iraq.
Held: The Military Police were operating when Britain was an occupying power. The question in each case was whether the Human Rights Act applied to the acts of the defendant. The . .
It was wrong to say that an asylum seeker had the option of internal flight where, having once fled, he had been informed that he was being sought by the police and would be returned to the part where he had a well founded fear of persecution. . .
This case is reported for what we say about the exercise of the power to make directions to give effect to a determination, pursuant to the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and pursuant to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 ( as amended . .
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 . .
‘The Appellant is a Lebanese citizen who claimed asylum in 2000 and was refused asylum in May 2001. When refusing asylum, the Secretary of State certified the asylum claim under paragraph 9(4)(b), Schedule 4 to the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. . .
The claimants sought damages and other reliefs after being wrongfully detained by immigration officers for several days, during which they had been detained at a detention centre and left locked up when it burned down, being released only by other . .
The appellants sought judicial review of the refusal of asylum. They sought leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal, but that had been refused. They then sought a statutory review by a judge of the Administrative division. That review . .
A family of asylum seekers with two disabled children would be destitute without ‘adequate’ accommodation. What was such accommodation?
Held: The authority was under an absolute duty to house such a family. In satisfying such duty, it was . .