Click the case name for better results:

LM and Others v Regina; Regina v M(L), B(M) and G(D): CACD 21 Oct 2010

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 is: (1) is there a reason to believe that the person has been trafficked? If so, then (2) if there … Continue reading LM and Others v Regina; Regina v M(L), B(M) and G(D): CACD 21 Oct 2010

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 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

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

Bashir and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 30 Jul 2018

(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 . .

Regina v Mohamed: CACD 19 Oct 2010

The court considered the defence available to a refugee under the 1999 Act when charged with the offence of having in his possession or under his control an identity document that either to his knowledge or belief is false, or to his knowledge or belief was improperly obtained or that relates to someone else. Held: … Continue reading Regina v Mohamed: CACD 19 Oct 2010

Regina v Fregenet Asfaw: HL 21 May 2008

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

Regina v Asfaw: CACD 21 Mar 2006

The defendant, an Ethiopian arrived in the UK on a forged passport. She came through immigration control at Heathrow, but then on the same day sought to leave to fly to the US. At that point she was arrested. She now appealed her conviction for attempting to obtain service by deception. Citations: [2006] EWCA Crim … Continue reading Regina v Asfaw: CACD 21 Mar 2006

Regina v Home Secretary, ex parte Sivakumaran: HL 16 Dec 1987

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

SXH v The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS): SC 11 Apr 2017

The Court was asked: ‘Does a decision by a public prosecutor to bring criminal proceedings against a person fall potentially within the scope of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in circumstances where a) the prosecutor has . .