(1) GM (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1630 is not authority for the proposition that an appellate court or tribunal has a free-standing duty, derived from section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (public authority not to act incompatibly with ECHR right), to disturb a decision of a lower tribunal. The jurisdiction of the appellate court or tribunal is governed by sections 12 and 14 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, which depends on the lower tribunal having made an error of law before its decision can be disturbed on appeal.
(2) A party who wishes to submit that a decision of a tribunal which is otherwise free from legal error should be disturbed on appeal on the basis identified by Carnwath LJ in E and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWCA Civ 49 should do so clearly, when seeking permission to appeal on that basis.
(3) In deciding whether the principles in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489, as applied by E and R, should be modified in exceptional circumstances, the ability to make fresh submissions to the Secretary of State, pursuant to paragraph 353 of the immigration rules, is highly material to the question of whether those principles should be diluted.
Judges:
The Hon Mr Justice Lane, President
Mr C M G Ockelton, Vice President
Citations:
[2021] UKUT 272 (IAC)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Immigration
Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.671707
