Category: Immigration

Koca v Secretary of State for the Home Department: SCS 27 May 2005

Judges:

Lord President And Lord Clarke And Lord Macfadyen

Citations:

[2005] ScotCS CSIH – 41

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

see also – Koca v Secretary of State for the Home Department SCS 22-Nov-2002
Judicial Review of a Determination of an Immigration Appeal Adjudicator dated 7th February, 2002 refusing the petitioner’s claim for asylum . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225340

Yilmaz v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 26 May 2005

The applicant had sought and been granted temporary leave to stay pending the checking of his documentation. He overstayed, and when he applied to stay permanently he was treated as an illegal immigrant.
Held: He had been properly so treated. A temporary admission merely allowed him not to be detained whilst the document check was made. The breach of a condition of that release made his presence illegal.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1068 (Admin), Times 27-Jul-2005

Links:

Bailii

Immigration, European

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225288

Ahmed v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 19 Apr 2005

The dependents sought permission to enter the UK, relying upon a declaration duly notarised that the claimant would sponsor his uncle and repay any income support received.
Held: A declaration of an intention was not an enforceable contract to maintain the uncle, and therefore was insufficient. A maintenance undertaking would give rise to civil and criminal liability and should only be accepted in clear words.

Judges:

May LJ, Rix LJ, Jacob LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 535

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Aslum Act 1999 115(10)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224903

RG (Suicide, Risk, Razgar Considered) Sri Lanka: IAT 23 Mar 2005

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00072

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Sectretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Razgar etc HL 17-Jun-2004
The claimant resisted removal after failure of his claim for asylum, saying that this would have serious adverse consequences to his mental health, infringing his rights under article 8. He appealed the respondent’s certificate that his claim was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224743

NM and others (Lone Women, Ashraf) Somalia CG: IAT 31 Mar 2005

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00076

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – ZO (Somalia) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 28-Jul-2010
The Directive gave certain rights to asylum applicants. The claimants had applied for asylum, and on failing in their applications, renwewed them, claiming the rights under the Directive again. The respondent said that the rights applied only on a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224741

Regina v Kraus: CACD 1982

Citations:

(1982) 4 Crim App R (S) 113

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Pierre Bouchereau ECJ 27-Oct-1977
ECJ The different language versions of a community text must be given a uniform interpretation and hence in the case of divergence between the versions the provision in question must be interpreted by reference . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Kluxen CACD 14-May-2010
The court considered the occasions on which a court should recommend deportation after completion of a prison sentence and how this might differ between EU and non-EU nationals.
Held: Since the 2007 it is not appropriate to recommend . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Immigration

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.415078

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 Department CA 31-Jan-2007
A Bangladeshi woman entered into an arranged polygamous marriage in Bangladesh and many years later dishonestly (led by her husband) obtained entry clearance as a visitor before then unsuccessfully seeking leave to remain as being financially . .
Cited – Patel and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Nov-2013
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.224538

Dirshe, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 20 Apr 2005

The asylum claimant had sought to be allowed to record his interview with the immigration officer, but this had been refused.
Held: Review was granted. Whilst in the majority of cases a recording should be unnecessary, since the Mapah case, public assistance in having a representative attend with the applicant at interview was no longer available, and the right to have someone attend was now nugatory. The interview was a critical part of the procedure. The applicant had to have a means of ensuring that the officer’s written record was accurate.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Latham LJ, Keene LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 421, Times 05-May-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Regina (Mapah) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 25-Feb-2003
The claimant challenged rules preventing him recording his interview when applying for asylum.
Held: The rule preventing such recordings was not improper. To allow such private recordings might give rise to much satellite litigation, and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.224310

Khan v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 7 Nov 2018

Renewed oral application for lave to appeal against a decision by the Secretary of State to (a) reject the appellant’s application to vary his leave to remain and (b) to remove him from the United Kingdom. This is accordingly a second-tier appeal to which the second-tier appeal rules apply. With second-tier appeals, the applicant must show either (a) that there is a real prospect of success on appeal and that the appeal raises an important point of principle or practice or that there is a compelling reason for hearing the appeal. The appeal is limited to points of law.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 3037

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.636164

KK (Recognition Elsewhere As Refugee) Democratic Republic of Congo: IAT 25 Feb 2005

Ouseley J P said: ‘As I have noted, independent documentary evidence regarding the procedures used to issue the appellant the refugee certificate in Iraq and refugee status in Turkey by the UNHCR was not before me, nor evidence regarding on what basis the appellant applied for this status and on which it was granted. The appellant’s evidence was most vague. Therefore, whilst the granting of refugee status to the appellant should be regarded as a starting point, it is not necessarily a very strong one, on its own, without any helpful evidence as to the basis and procedures for the previous grant. I, however, do bear in mind that it is a starting point, that it is significant and that whilst considering the substantive merits of the case, the most clear and substantial grounds, if they exist, must be provided for coming to a different conclusion’
. . And ‘The earlier grant of asylum is not binding, but it is the appropriate starting point for the consideration of the claim; the grant is a very significant matter. There should be some certainty and stability in the position of refugees. The adjudicator must consider whether there are the most clear and substantial grounds for coming to a different conclusion. The adjudicator must be satisfied that the decision was wrong. The language of Babela is that of the burden of proof: their status is prima facie made out but it can be rebutted; the burden of proof in so doing is on the Secretary of State. We do not think that that is entirely satisfactory as a way of expressing it and it leaves uncertain to what standard the burden has to be discharged and what he has to disprove. The same effect without some of the legal difficulties is established by the language which we have used.’

Judges:

Ouseley J P

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00054

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – IA (Iran) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department (Scotland) SC 29-Jan-2014
The appellant Iranian challenged refusal of his claim for asylum. He had been granted refugee status in Iraq and in Turkey by the United Nations commission, but on arrival in the UK, his asylum claim had been rejected on the basis of the credibility . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223327

KK (Ahmadi, Unexceptional, Risk on Return) Pakistan: IAT 4 Feb 2005

The Secretary of State appealed to the Tribunal from a determination allowing on asylum grounds and human rights grounds the appeal by the Respondent against the Secretary of State’s decision to refuse asylum to the Claimant and to refuse him leave to enter the United Kingdom and to propose to give directions for the removal of the Claimant to Pakistan.

Judges:

Freeman VP

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00033

Links:

Bailii

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223326

Hoxha and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 10 Mar 2005

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 persecution.
Held: The decision on the grant required the fear to remain well founded up to the time of determination. Where the situation in the home country had improved so that the fear was no longer well founded and current, the application for asylum must fail.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2005] UKHL 19, Times 11-Mar-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 1063

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Adan, Same, ex parte Aitsegeur HL 20-Dec-2000
The Convention gave protection to an asylum seeker fearing persecution by non-state agents in his country of origin where that government was unable or unwilling to provide protection. France and Germany did not recognise this right, and therefore . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another ex parte Shah HL 25-Mar-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 . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
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 . .
Cited – Horvath v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 7-Jul-2000
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 . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Home Department v Arif CA 17-Feb-1999
Depending always on the particular facts of the case, there might well be ‘an evidential burden on the Secretary of State to establish that [the asylum seeker] could safely be returned home.’ . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Sepet and Bulbil v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 20-Mar-2003
The appellants sought asylum. They were Kurdish pacifists, and claimed that they would be forced into the armed forces on pain of imprisonment if they were returned to Turkey.
Held: The concept of ‘persecution’ was central. It is necessary to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Fornah v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 9-Jun-2005
The applicant sought refugee status, saying that if returned home to Sierra Leone, she would as a young woman be liable to be circumcised against her will.
Held: Female sexual mutilation ‘is an evil practice internationally condemned and in . .
Cited – ST Eritrea, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 21-Mar-2012
The Tribunal had confirmed the appellant’s refugee status, but the respondent had ordered nevertheless that she be returned. The judge’s order setting aside that decision had been overturned in the Court of Appeal.
Held: The claimant’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223370

Sithokozile Mlauzi v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 7 Feb 2005

The applicant appealed against the decision of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal refusing asylum. She feared persecution if returned to Zimbabwe because of her membership of the opposition political party. The IAT had disturbed the adjudicator’s decision on the facts.
Held: The Tribunal had no sufficient basis to disturb the adjudicator’s decision, and the appeal was allowed. The court noted that the Treasury Solciitor had failed to provide papers more than seven days before the hearing as required by the rules. Neither the court not the appellant’s solicitors knew what they had to prepare for despite repeated attempts to discover this. Late filing might be accepted in cases of emergency, but the defaulting party must at least forewarn the court and other parties why there was to be a default.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke (Vice President Of The Court Of Appeal, Civil Division) Lord Justice Latham Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 128, Times 15-Feb-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Scribes West Limited v Relsa Anstalt and Another (No 1) CA 1-Jul-2004
The court handed down a New Practice Direction 52 for grounds of appeal, decisions in permissions to appeal, notices to respondents of appeals, appeal bundles etc. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Miftari v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-May-2005
The court emphasised the limited nature of the IAT’s jurisdiction under the 2002 Act, which is now restricted to considering points of law only: ‘Since the IAT now has jurisdiction to determine only points of law, it cannot put itself in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223303

El-Rifai v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Feb 2005

The applicant was a Palestinian born in the Lebanon, and appealed the dismissal of his application for asylum.
Held: The adjudicator had been referred to evidence of mistreatment of Palestinians in Lebanon, but then had failed to address that issue in his decision. The reports were credible, and a decision which did not address the risks identified could not stand.

Citations:

Times 01-Mar-2005, [2005] EWCA Civ 385

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223060

OW (Approach To Subsequent Tribunal Decisions) Somalia: IAT 23 Feb 2005

Home Office appeal in the case of a citizen of Somalia who said he came from the Dabarweyne sub-clan of the Benadiri. His appeal was allowed on both asylum and human rights grounds by an adjudicator. The adjudicator’s decision is challenged on three grounds. The first two relate to what might be described as the adjudicator’s differential credibility findings. First she disbelieved the claimant on his individual history; but she believed, on the evidence of his supporting witness, a Mr Aagane, that the claimant was indeed a member of the Dabarweyne.

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00052

Links:

Bailii

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222914

SG (Article 3, Military Service, Detention) Algeria: IAT 1 Feb 2005

The Secretary of State appealed against a decision refusing the claimant’s asylum appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State refusing leave to enter the United Kingdom after refusal of asylum, however allowing the claimant’s appeal under Article 3 of the ECHR.

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00031

Links:

Bailii

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222886

AB and others (Risk- Return – Isreali Check Points) Palestine: IAT 1 Feb 2005

The Tribunal considered ‘whether there is a real risk of persecution of a returned failed asylum seeker of Palestinian ethnicity from the Occupied Territories at the point of return when he will have to pass through a checkpoint manned by the Israeli Authorities in order to regain the West Bank or the Gaza Strip as the case may be. ‘

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00046

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222878

MM (Certificate and Remittal, Jurisdiction) Lebanon: IAT 31 Jan 2005

‘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. Those provisions relate to the asylum claim. There are other provisions within paragraph 9 which relate to human rights claims but which were not referred to in the Secretary of State’s letter.’

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00027

Links:

Bailii

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222874

YB (Allegations against Adjudicator: Presidential Note) Jamaica: IAT 1 Feb 2005

Appeal from a decision of an adjudicator (Mr EH Woodcraft), sitting at Bradford on 23 March 2004, dismissing an asylum and human rights appeal by a citizen of Jamaica, now 24. Permission to appeal was given on the basis of a claim apparently suggesting that the adjudicator had refused to hear a witness for the claimant.

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00029

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222892

LW (Cancellation Refugee Status: UNCHR Note) Ethiopia: IAT 3 Feb 2005

Appeal from a decision of an adjudicator dismissing an asylum and human rights appeal by a citizen of Ethiopia. Permission was given on the basis of the attitude taken by the adjudicator to the claimant having been granted asylum in Uganda, as it is accepted she was in 1995.

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00042

Links:

Bailii

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222884

JC (SS.82 and 83, Rights of Appeal) Ethiopia: IAT 1 Feb 2005

The Appellant (a national of Ethiopia, born on 13 November 1985) has appealed, with permission, against a Determination dismissing his ‘appeal’ on asylum and human rights against the Secretary of State’s decision to refuse asylum and to grant limited leave to enter the United Kingdom until the day before the Appellant’s 18th birthday.

Citations:

[2005] UKIAT 00030

Links:

Bailii

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222882

LR (Roma, Remedies, Police Brutality) Romania CG: IAT 2 Sep 2002

Appeal against directions for removal to Romania.
Held: The Adjudicator was entitled to find upon the totality of the evidence that applying the removal directions which are the subject of the appeal would not cause any breach on the part of the United Kingdom of either the Refugee or Human Rights Convention.

Citations:

[2002] UKIAT 04123

Links:

Bailii

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.221917

TK (Article 3, Blind Person, KAA, Prison Condition) Iraq CG: IAT 8 Aug 2002

The Secretary of State appeals to the Tribunal against the determination of an Adjudicator allowing on human rights grounds an appeal by TK against the decision of the Secretary of State to refuse to grant leave to enter the United Kingdom.

Judges:

Prof D B Casson, AVP

Citations:

[2002] UKIAT 03576

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 83

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.221904

IG (Indra Gurung) (Exclusion, Risk, Maoists) Nepal CG (Starred): IAT 14 Oct 2002

The Tribunal gave guidance to adjudicators on the proper approach to the Refugee Convention’s Exclusion Clauses at Art 1F. The claimant had been a film star but was said to have become involved in a Maoist movement said to be involved in terrorism.
Held: ‘If the Nepalese authorities saw the appellant as a member of the CPN (Maoist) party, it was difficult to see that they would limit themselves to a legitimate process of prosecution. Going by the objective country materials placed before us, we see no reason to differ from the conclusions reached by the Tribunal in Rajesh Gurung and subsequent cases such as Prakesh Sharma [2002] UKIAT 02943 and Hane [2002] UKIAT 03945. Indeed, in our view the more comprehensive and in some respects more recent objective materials placed before us serve only to confirm the findings of fact reached by the Tribunal in these cases to the effect that someone currently viewed as a Maoist would face persecution rather than simple prosecution.’ and
‘these materials do indicate that the use of torture, disappearances, and arbitrary detention remains widespread, particularly in areas affected by the Maoist insurgency. Whilst extrajudicial killings have not been widespread, most of those concerned were suspected of being sympathisers with the Maoists . . Reports of government excesses against Maoists in the early part of 2002 in the context of police and military drives against the Maoists are particularly alarming.’ and
‘In view of the considerable body of evidence showing that Maoists are far more likely to experience torture and ill treatment in detention, such persecution would also demonstrably be for a Convention reason of political opinion.’

Judges:

Collins J P

Citations:

[2002] UKIAT 04870, [2003] INLR 133, [2003] Imm AR 115

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Criticised – JS (Sri Lanka), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 17-Mar-2010
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: . .
Cited – JS (Sri Lanka), Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary Of State for the Home Department CA 30-Apr-2009
Joint Enterprise Liability – War Crimes accusation
The applicant appealed against an order for his removal. He was accused of complicity in war crimes.
Held: To find an asylum seeker to be subject to the Rome statute so as to exclude him from protection it had to be shown that there had been a . .
Cited – Gurung v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1-May-2003
The claimant sought asylum having been a member of the communist party in Nepal, and a leader of its communist section. The party had been involved in serious violence, but having been arrested he had not been ill-treated. He was now subject to an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.221938