Category: Immigration

Eisa, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Dublin; Articles 27 and 17): UTIAC 24 May 2017

(1) Judicial review is a remedy of sufficient flexibility to comply with Article 27(1) of Regulation 604/2013 (Dublin III).
(2) Since an applicant is allowed to remain while this review is being dealt with, there is a suspension of the 6 months within which transfer must be effected in accordance with Article 27(3) of Dublin III.
(3) There is no obligation on the Secretary of State to exercise the power under Article 17 to deal with a claim and, albeit a refusal to exercise the discretion under Article 17 is judicially reviewable, it would require wholly exceptional circumstances to justify any relief being granted if otherwise there was no bar to transfer.

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 261 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588807

ZMM (Article 15(C)) Libya CG: UTIAC 28 Jun 2017

The violence in Libya has reached such a high level that substantial grounds are shown for believing that a returning civilian would, solely on account of his presence on the territory of that country or region, face a real risk of being subject to a threat to his life or person.

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 263 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588811

RM, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Dublin; Article 27 ; Procedure): UTIAC 11 May 2017

(1) The scope of a challenge to a transfer decision brought, pursuant to art. 27 of Regulation 604/13 (Dublin III), on the basis that the decision infringes the second subparagraph of art. 19(2) of Dublin III is limited to ‘traditional’ public law grounds.
(2) Section 15(5A) of the Tribunals, Court and Enforcement Act 2007 applies to applications for judicial review, in which the application for permission to bring such proceedings was received by the Upper Tribunal on, or after, 8 August 2016.

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 260 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588809

JK, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 22 Jun 2017

‘challenge to a decision by the Secretary of State for the Home Department (‘the Respondent’) as to the weekly rate of asylum support paid for child dependants of asylum seekers. Underlying the challenge, however, are questions as to the proper province of the Judiciary and that of the Executive in matters such as this.’

Judges:

Hallett, Gross, Irwin LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 433, [2017] WLR(D) 416

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Constitutional, Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588325

The Secretary of State for The Home Department v MM (Zimbabwe): CA 22 Jun 2017

The court was asked whether it was open to the Secretary of State to revoke the claimant’s refugee status relying on changes in the circumstances of the home country.

Judges:

Black, Sales, Henderson LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 797, [2017] WLR(D) 418

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588332

Khan v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 8 Jun 2017

The claimant had sought judicial review of the respondent’s refusal to him of extended leave to remain. The Upper Tribunal had rejected his claim for review saying that he had not taken the aveune of an appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The Upper Tribunal should have looked at the case on its merits despite the availability of the alternate remedy. Permission to bring review had been granted, and the Tribunalshould have considered the waste of time and costs and the disappointment created.

Judges:

Gross, Underhill LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 424, [2017] WLR(D) 394

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 3C

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588201

Kastrati And Others (Right of Asylum): ECJ 3 May 2012

ECJ Dublin system – Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 – Procedure for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application – Third-country nationals in possession of a valid visa issued by the ‘Member State responsible’ within the meaning of Regulation No 343/2003 – Asylum application lodged in a Member State other than the State responsible pursuant to that regulation – Application for a residence permit in a Member State other than the State responsible followed by the withdrawal of the asylum application – Withdrawal occurring before the Member State responsible accepted that it should take charge – Withdrawal terminating the procedures set up by Regulation No 343/2003

Citations:

[2012] EUECJ C-620/10, [2012] WLR(D) 139, [2013] 1 WLR 1

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Kastrati And Others (Right of Asylum) ECJ 12-Jan-2012
ECJ Right of asylum – Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 – Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application – Entry by means of a Schengen visa – Lodging of an asylum application in a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.584361

Britcits v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 24 May 2017

Appeal from rejection of application for judicial review seeking to quash provisions of the Immigration Rules introduced in 2012 on the admission to the UK of adult dependant relatives of British citizens, persons settled in the UK and those in the UK pursuant to refugee leave or humanitarian protection.

Judges:

Sie Terence Etherton MR, Davis, Sales LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 368

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.584523

Amirteymour v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 10 May 2017

This appeal is concerned with the extent to which an individual appealing to the First-tier Tribunal (‘FTT’) against a decision of the Secretary of State to refuse to issue a derivative residence card under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (‘the EEA Regulations’) is entitled to introduce a distinct human rights claim for leave to remain in the United Kingdom in that appeal.

Judges:

Beatson, Ryder SPT, Sales LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 353

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights, European

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583646

LC (Albania) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: CA 9 May 2017

The court was asked whether the guidance upon the correct approach to sexual orientation asylum claims given by the Supreme Court in HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 31; [2011] 1 AC 592 (‘HJ (Iran)’) still hold good?

Judges:

Beatson, David Richards, Hickinbottom LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 351, [2017] WLR(D) 318

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583656

O and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 31 Jan 2019

The Court was asked have delays by the Home Office in the process of making ‘Conclusive Grounds’ decisions in respect of potential victims of human trafficking become so significant and so widespread as to be unlawful?

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 148 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Administrative, Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.633161

Ahmed v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Request for A Preliminary Ruling – Article 99 of The Rules of Procedure of The Court of Justice – Regulation (Eu) No 604/2013 – Determination: ECJ 5 Apr 2017

Request for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 – Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national – Application for international protection made by a third-country national benefiting from the status conferred by subsidiary protection – Applicability of the take-back procedure

Citations:

C-36/17, [2017] EUECJ C-36/17 – CO

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581751

Kajuga, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 5 Apr 2017

Appeal from dismissal of application for a declaration that the claimant had been unlawfully detained by the UK immigration authorities between 10 November 2011 and 22 March 2012.

Judges:

McFarlane, Flaux LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 240

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581431

El-Qaddafi v Council: ECFI 28 Mar 2017

(Judgment : Common Foreign and Security Policy – Restrictive Measures Taken Against Libya – Freezing of Funds) Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken against Libya – Freezing of funds – Restrictions on the entry into and transit through the territory of the European Union – Retention of the applicant’s name – Rights of the defence – Obligation to state reasons

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:227, [2017] EUECJ T-681/14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581152

Awuku v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 23 Mar 2017

Appeal by Mr Awuku against a decision allowing the Secretary of State’s appeal against a decision allowing an appeal against the decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department refusing the appellant’s application for a residence card as a confirmation of a right to reside in the United Kingdom on the ground that the appellant was not the ‘spouse’ of an EEA national for the purposes of Regulation 7 of the EEA Regulations.

Judges:

Llloyd Jones, King, Lindblom LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 178

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581067

ZX, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: CA 17 Mar 2017

The appellant had been convicted of terrorism related offences, and had served his sentence. On release, his licence precluded his having contact with his children. He now challenged that condition.

Judges:

Sir James Munby P FDm Davis, Lindblom LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 155

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581083

Mukarubega v Prefect of Police, Prefect of the Seine-Saint-Denis: ECJ 5 Nov 2014

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Visa, asylum, immigration and other policies relating to the free movement of persons – Directive 2008/115 / EC – Return of illegally staying third-country nationals – Procedure for the adoption of a return order – Principle Observance of the rights of the defense – Right of an irregular third-country national to be heard before the adoption of a decision likely to affect his interests – Refusal of the administration, with an obligation to leave The territory, to grant such a national a residence permit in respect of asylum – Right to be heard before the return decision is rendered

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2014:2336, [2014] EUECJ C-166/13

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2008/115/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Mukarubega v Prefect of Police, Prefect of the Seine-Saint-Denis ECJ 25-Jun-2014
ECJ Advocate General’s Opinion – Area of freedom, security and justice – Directive 2008/115/EC – Return of third-country nationals residing – Procedure for the adoption of a decision to return – Principle of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580912

HID, BA v Minister For Justice, Equality And Law Reform, Ireland, Attorney General: ECJ 31 Jan 2013

ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Common European Asylum System – Application by a national of a third country seeking refugee status – Directive 2005/85/EC – Article 23 – Possibility of prioritising the processing of asylum applications – National procedure applying a prioritised procedure for the examination of applications by persons belonging to a certain category defined on the basis of nationality or country of origin – Right to an effective judicial remedy – Article 39 of Directive 2005/85 – Concept of ‘court or tribunal’ within the meaning of that article

Citations:

[2013] EUECJ C-175/11, [2013] WLR(D) 39

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Directive 2005/85/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Immigration

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580686

Uddin and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 7 Aug 2006

Application for judicial review of listing decisions taken by the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal in relation to two appeals against decisions made by an entry clearance officer in Bangladesh.

Judges:

Jackson J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2127 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Administrative

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.244860

The Open Rights Group and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: CA 26 May 2021

This appeal is concerned with the lawfulness of statutory restrictions on data protection rights, in the context of immigration. By paragraph 4 of Schedule 2 to the Data Protection Act 2018 (‘DPA 2018’) Parliament enacted ‘the Immigration Exemption’. This disapplies some data protection rights where their application would be likely to prejudice immigration control.

Judges:

Lord Justice Underhill
(Vice-President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division))
Lord Justice Singh
And
Lord Justice Warby

Citations:

[2021] EWCA Civ 800, [2021] 1 WLR 3611, [2021] WLR(D) 303

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 2018, General Data Protection Regulation, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information, Immigration, European, Human Rights

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.662794

Khan, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 17 Nov 2014

The claimant challenged the lawfulness of a decision of the defendant of 9 August 2013 to certify his asylum and human rights claims as clearly unfounded under section 94(2) of the 2002 Act.

Judges:

Gill DHCJ

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3725 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.538781

Ayelabola, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 30 Jun 2010

Claim for judicial review against the Secretary of State’s decision to remove the claimant to Nigeria and cancel his entry clearance visa, which was originally granted as a business visa in 2006, valid for 5 years, to enable him to enter this country for the purpose of doing business.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2223 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.421877

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Margueritte: CA 1982

The applicant first arrived from Mauritius in 1972, and was given limited leave to enter for a few months. He over-stayed until June 1974 when he paid a short visit to France. On return he was given one month’s leave to enter, but again overstayed. In 1978 he married a woman who was settled here and as a result was granted indefinite leave to remain. In 1979 he applied to register as a United Kingdom citizen, on the basis of five years’ ordinary residence here, in accordance with a provision inserted into the 1948 Act by the 1971 Act, which provided that a person is not to be treated for the purposes of any provision in that Act as ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom at a time when he is there in breach of the immigration laws. The Court was now asked to say that the judge in the court below had been wrong when he held that the words ‘ordinarily resident’ in s. 5A of the British Nationality Act 1948 meant, in effect, ‘ordinarily and lawfully resident’.
Held: The Court construed the new provision in the British Nationality Act in the same way as applied under the 1971 Act.
Oliver LJ said: ‘the question which we are called upon to answer is not, in my judgment, what is the natural or normal meaning of the expression [‘ordinarily resident’] in general, but what is its meaning in section 5A of the British Nationality Act 1948.’
Kerr LJ said: ‘on the true construction of the words ‘ordinarily resident’ in Appendix A to Schedule 1, viewed in the context of the Immigration Act 1971 as a whole, did parliament intend that a period should count towards the qualifying period of five years if the person in question was then in this country unlawfully?’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Oliver, Kerr LJJ

Citations:

[1982] 3 WLR 753, [1983] QB 180

Statutes:

British Nationality Act 1948, Immigration Act 1971 33(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Barnet London Borough Council, Ex parte Shah HL 16-Dec-1982
The five applicants had lived in the UK for at least three years while attending school or college. All five were subject to immigration control, four had entered as students with limited leave to remain for the duration of their studies, and the . .
Cited – Mark v Mark HL 30-Jun-2005
The petitioner sought to divorce her husband. Both were Nigerian nationals, and had married under a valid polygamous marriage in Nigeria. She claimed that the courts had jurisdiction because of her habitual residence here despite the fact that her . .
Cited – Bibi and others v Entry Clearance Officer, Dhaka CA 18-Jul-2007
The deceased had come to live in the UK and obtain citizenship under somebody else’s identity. After his death his wife and children sought clearance to come to live here.
Held: Her appeal failed. The residence of her late husband was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.228186

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Kassam: CA 1980

Discrimination was alleged against the immigration authorities.
Held: In dealing with people coming in under the immigration rules, the immigration authorities were not providing ‘services’ within the meaning of the Act. The words the ‘circumstances relevant for the purposes of any provision of this Act’ are the circumstances in which discrimination is prohibited by the Act.

Judges:

Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1980] 1 WLR 1037, [1980] 2 All ER 330, [1979] Imm AR 132

Statutes:

Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 27-Feb-2003
The applicant was a chief inspector of police. She had been prevented from carrying out appraisals of other senior staff, and complained of sex discrimination.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The tribunal had taken a two stage approach. It . .
Cited – Savjani v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1981
The question arose as whether the Inland Revenue were concerned with the provision of services in their activities relating to the adminsitration of the taxation system, so as to bring them within section 20 of the 1976 Act.
Held: They were . .
Cited – Regina v Entry Clearance Officer, Bombay, Ex parte Amin HL 1983
The House was asked whether the grant of special vouchers under the special voucher scheme introduced came within section 29 of the 1975 Act. Acts performed pursuant to a government function did not come within the meaning of service. Discrimination . .
Cited – Saggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Discrimination

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.207074

Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service: HL 17 Oct 2002

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 destitute asylum seekers were excluded from benefit, and they had to rely upon the respondent. The House considered the value of the Explanatory notes now published with Acts: ‘Insofar as the Explanatory Notes cast light on the objective setting or contextual scene of the statute, and the mischief at which it is aimed, such materials are therefore always admissible aids to construction. They may be admitted for what logical value they have.’ Lord Steyn: ‘The starting point is that language in all legal texts conveys meaning according to the circumstances in which it was used. It follows that the context must always be identified and considered before the process of construction or during it. It is therefore wrong to say that the court may only resort to evidence of the contextual scene when an ambiguity has arisen.’

Judges:

Steyn, Slynn, Hoffmann, Millett and Rodger LL

Citations:

Times 18-Oct-2002, [2002] UKHL 38, [2002] 1 WLR 2956, [2002] 4 All ER 654, [2002] HLR 58, (2002) 5 CCL Rep 511, [2003] BLGR 23

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 21, Immigration and Asylum Appeals Act 1999 95 116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Prenn v Simmonds HL 1971
Backgroun Used to Construe Commercial Contract
Commercial contracts are to be construed in the light of all the background information which could reasonably have been expected to have been available to the parties in order to ascertain what would objectively have been understood to be their . .
Cited – Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Yngvar Hansen-Tangen (The ‘Diana Prosperity’) HL 1976
In construing a contract, three principles can be found. The contextual scene is always relevant. Secondly, what is admissible as a matter of the rules of evidence under this heading is what is arguably relevant, but admissibility is not decisive. . .
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – River Wear Commissioners v Adamson HL 1877
It was not necessary for there to be an ambiguity in a statutory provision for a court to be allowed to look at the surrounding circumstances.
As to the Golden Rule of interpretation: ‘It is to be borne in mind that the office of the judge is . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited HL 7-Dec-2000
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 . .
Cited – Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Others HL 25-Jul-2002
The Northern Ireland Parliament had elected its first minister and deputy more than six weeks after the election, but the Act required the election to be within that time. It was argued that as a creature of statute, the Parliament could not act . .
Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council ex parte A, London Borough of Lambeth ex parte X and similar CA 17-Feb-1997
This was an appeal from orders of certiorari quashing the decisions of three local authorities refusing to provide accommodation for the respondents, four asylum seekers, whose applications for asylum were presently being considered by the Secretary . .
Cited – Regina v Wandsworth London Borough Council, Ex Parte O; Leicester City Council, Ex Parte Bhikha CA 7-Sep-2000
The applicants were immigrants awaiting determination of their applications for exceptional leave to remain, and who came to suffer from serious illness. Each applied for and was refused assistance from their local authority.
Held: The . .
Cited – Wahid v London Borough of Tower Hamlets CA 7-Mar-2002
Gilliatt The appellant suffered from schizophrenia. He was refused permission to apply for judicial review and for orders requiring the local authority not just to provide suitable accommodation but better . .
Appeal from – Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service CA 10-Apr-2001
. .
At first instance – Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service Admn 27-Feb-2001
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of Mani) v London Borough of Lambeth CA 9-Jul-2003
Where a destitute and disabled asylum seeker had a clear need for care and attention, the local authority had a duty to provide it. The claimant was an asylum seeker, with impaired mobility and a history of mental halth difficulties. At first he was . .
Cited – Regina (on the Application of A) v National Asylum Support Service, London Borough of Waltham Forest CA 23-Oct-2003
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 . .
Cited – Regina, ex parte O v The London Borough of Haringey, The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 4-May-2004
The court considered the duties of local authorities to support infirm asylum seekers with children.
Held: The authority had an obligation to support the adult, but the responsibility for the children fell on the National Asylum Support . .
Applied – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 5 of 2002) HL 14-Oct-2004
The Attorney General sought the correct interpretation of section 17 where a court was asked as to whether evidence obtained from a telephone tapping had been taken from a public or private network. A chief constable suspected that the defendants, . .
Cited – Regina v Montila and Others HL 25-Nov-2004
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 . .
Cited – In re P (a minor by his mother and litigation friend); P v National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers HL 27-Feb-2003
The pupil had been excluded from school but then ordered to be re-instated. The teachers, through their union, refused to teach him claiming that he was disruptive. The claimant appealed a refusal of an injunction. The injunction had been refused on . .
Cited – Phillips v Rafiq and Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) CA 13-Feb-2007
The MIB appealed from a judgment making it liable for an award of damages to the estate of the deceased who had been a passenger in a vehicle which he knew to be being driven without insurance. The estate had not sued the MIB directly, but first . .
Cited – King v The Serious Fraud Office CACD 18-Mar-2008
Restraint and Disclosure orders had been made on without notice applications at the request of South Africa. The applicant appealed a refusal of their discharge.
Held: Such orders did not apply to the applicant’s assets in Scotland. The orders . .
Cited – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Slough Borough Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local social services authority is obliged, under section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act, to arrange (and pay for) residential accommodation for a person subject to immigration control who is HIV positive but whose only . .
Cited – Persimmon Homes (South Coast) Ltd v Hall Aggregates (South Coast) Ltd and Another TCC 10-Oct-2008
The parties had agreed for the sale of land under an option agreement. The builder purchasers now sought to exercise rights to adjust the price downwards.
Held: The provisions had been intended and had achieved a prompt and binding settlement . .
Cited – Mucelli v Government of Albania (Criminal Appeal From Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice) HL 21-Jan-2009
The House was asked whether someone who wished to appeal against an extradition order had an obligation also to serve his appellant’s notice on the respondent within the seven days limit, and whether the period was capable of extension by the court. . .
Cited – Rollins, Regina v SC 28-Jul-2010
The court was asked whether the Financial Services Authority had a power to prosecute money laundering offences under the 2002 Act, or whether, as contended by the defendant, its powers were limited to sections under the 2000 Act.
Held: The . .
Cited – Oceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd and Others SC 27-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether facts which (a) are communicated between the parties in the course of without prejudice negotiations and (b) would, but for the without prejudice rule, be admissible as part of the factual matrix or surrounding . .
Cited – Horton v Henry CA 7-Oct-2016
No obligation on bankrupt to draw on pension fund
The trustee in bankruptcy appealed against a decision dismissing his application for an income payments order pursuant to section 310 of the 1986 Act in respect of income which might become payable to the respondent from his personal pension . .
Cited – Hutchings, Re Application for Judicial Review SC 6-Jun-2019
The appellant, a former army officer challenged proceedings against him as to the death of a civilian shot in Northern Ireland in 1974. His trial had been certified for trial by judge alone, and without a jury under section 1 of the 2007 Act.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Health, Immigration, Benefits, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.177452

Rahman v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 19 Dec 2005

Appeal against a decision of the AIT dismissing the appellant’s appeal against the determination of the adjudicator in his turn dismissing the appellant’s appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State refusing the appellant’s asylum claim and setting directions for her removal to Iraq.

Judges:

Ward, Laws, Sedley LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1826, [2006] Imm AR 283

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579721

Eschenbrenner v Bundesagentur fur Arbeit: ECJ 2 Mar 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom of movement for workers – Article 45 TFEU – Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 – Article 7 – Equal treatment – Frontier worker subject to income tax in the Member State of residence – Benefit paid by the Member State of employment in the event of the employer’s insolvency – Detailed rules for the calculation of the insolvency benefit – Notional taking into account of the income tax of the Member State of employment – Insolvency benefit lower than the previous net remuneration – Bilateral convention for the avoidance of double taxation

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:152, [2017] EUECJ C-496/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Employment, Immigration

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579674

London School of Science and Technology, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 8 Mar 2017

The Claimant sought judicial review of the Defendant’s decision to revoke LSST’s Tier 4 sponsor licence, and revocation of LSST’s Tier 2 licence which occurred at the same time.

Judges:

Sara Cockerill QC DHCJ

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 423 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Education

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579634

MR, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 10 Mar 2017

The claimant challenged the use of the Royal Prerogative to withdraw his passport. He had as a youth been involved with a terrorist organisation, but said that he now regretted that and was no longer so involved. He had sought to set up a business, and had made several trips abroad which had concerned the authorities.
Held: The application for judicial review was dismissed.

Judges:

Bean LJ, Supperstone J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 469 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex parte Cromer Ring Mill Ltd 1982
Forbes J considered a suggestion that the lower tribiunal had taken into account irrelevant matters: ‘the case wholly supports the formulation in Professor de Smith’s book: ‘If the influence of irrelevant factors is established, it does not appear . .
Cited – Regina v Broadcasting Complaints Commission, ex parte Owen CA 1985
The BBC is a creation of the Crown through the grant of a Charter in the exercise of the Royal Prerogative, and it exercises its functions under agreement with and licences from the Government. The court expressly declined to express a view on the . .
Cited – Simplex GE (Holdings) Limited v Secretary of State CA 1988
A decision should in general be quashed if by way of error a relevant consideration is not taken into account or an irrelevant consideration is taken into account unless the decision-maker was bound on the facts to have reached the same conclusion . .
Cited – John v Rees and Others; Martin and Another v Davis and Others ChD 1969
The Court was asked as to the validity of proceedings at a meeting of the members of the local Labour Party which had broken up in disorder. The proceedings were instituted by the leader of one faction on behalf of himself and all other members of . .
Cited – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .
Cited – XH and AI, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 2-Feb-2017
The court heard appeals concerning the cancellation of the passports of the appellants, XH and AI, on the grounds that the Secretary of State suspects that they plan to travel to be involved in terrorism-related activity. The Secretary of State was . .
Cited – FDA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another CA 20-Mar-2012
The FDA and other trades unions challenged the use by the respondent of the Consumer Price Index rather than the Retail Prices Index for use in the uprating of civil service pensions.
Held: The respondent was so entitled. In ordinary language, . .
Cited – Smith v North East Derbyshire Primary Care Trust CA 23-Aug-2006
The cliamant had challenged a decision by the respondent on the method of provision of general practioner medical services in her village. She said that the procedure had been flawed in that the consultation had been inadequate.
Held: Her . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Immigration

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579644

ZS, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 3 Feb 2017

The claimant, a 15 year olf Afghan boy was an unaccompanied refugee child who was for an appreciable period of time residing in the camp in Calais in France. He sought refuge underthe ‘Dubs’ amendment.

Judges:

Holman J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 255 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 2016 67

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Children

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.579629

Beoku Betts v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 25 Jun 2008

The appellant had arrived from Sierra Leone and obtained student permits. When they expired he sought asylum, citing his family’s persecution after a coup, and that fact that other members of his family now had indefinite leave, and he said that an order returning him to Sierra Leone would impinge on their right to family life.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The effect on other family members with a right to respect for their family life with the appellant must also be taken into account in an appeal to the AIT on human rights grounds. Each family member had to be treated as a victim.
Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood said: ‘Together these members enjoy a single family life and whether or not the removal would interfere disproportionately with it has to be looked at by reference to the family unit as a whole and the impact of removal upon each member. If overall the removal would be disproportionate, all affected family members are to be regarded as victims.’
Lady Hale said: ‘To insist that an appeal to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal consider only the effect upon other family members as it affects the appellant, and that a judicial review brought by other family members considers only the effect upon the appellant as it affects them, is not only artificial and impracticable. It also risks missing the central point about family life, which is that the whole is greater than the sum of its individual parts. The right to respect for the family life of one necessarily encompasses the right to respect for the family life of others, normally a spouse or minor children, with whom that family life is enjoyed.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2008] UKHL 39, [2008] 3 WLR 166, Times 01-Aug-2008, [2009] AC 115, [2008] Imm AR 688, [2008] HRLR 38, [2008] UKHRR 935, [2008] INLR 489, 25 BHRC 245, [2008] 4 All ER 1146

Links:

Bailii, HL

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 65, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 82 84

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Beoku Betts v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 6-Jul-2005
The appellant arrived aged 19 from Sierra Leone and was granted leave to enter as a student, which leave was extended. His famiy had been politically active and suffered abuse after a coup. When his leave expired he applied for asylum. Other family . .
Cited – Starred Kehinde (Appeal, Section 65 1999 Act, Rights of Others) Nigeria IAT 19-Dec-2001
‘In an appeal under section 65, therefore, there is no obligation to take into account claims made about the human rights of individuals other than the appellant or individuals who have not themselves been the subject of a decision which is under . .
Cited – Ahmadi and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 12-Dec-2005
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 . .
Cited – Starred SS (Eco, Article 8) Malaysia IAT 29-Apr-2004
From refusal of entry clearance . .
Cited – AC v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Admn 11-Mar-2003
. .
Cited – Miao v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 16-Feb-2006
Husband and wife sought leave to remain to care for the husband’s father who was settled as a refugee, but suffered chronic depression and presented a high suicide risk.
Held: The appeal succeeded. . .
Cited – Mokrani -c- France ECHR 15-Jul-2003
(French Text Only) ‘[R]elationships between adults do not necessarily benefit from protection under article 8 of the Convention unless the existence of additional elements of dependence, other than normal emotional ties, can be proven.’ . .
Cited – VN (Uganda) v Entry Clearance Officer CA 19-Mar-2008
. .
Cited – AB (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 6-Dec-2007
The claimant came here from Jamaica, but overstayed. She married a British citizen in 2001 and applied for leave to remain. That was refused.
Held: In refusing such a claim, the tribunal ought to have given respect to the husband’s human . .
Cited – Sezen v The Netherlands ECHR 31-Jan-2006
The case concerned ‘a functioning family unit where the parents and children are living together’. The court considered wehether a deportation would infringe the human rights of te applicant: ‘The Court has previously held that domestic measures . .
Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – NG (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 4-Dec-2007
A Pakistani mother, with two young children, who was to be deported after separating from her husband, a British citizen of Pakistani origin. Contact between father and children would thereby be broken.
Held: ‘There was no prospect of the . .

Cited by:

Applied – Chikwamba v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 25-Jun-2008
The appellant had fled Zimbabwe. Though her asylum application was refused, she was not returned for the temporary suspension of such orders to Zimbabwe. In the meantime she married and had a child. She now appealed an order for her removal citing . .
Cited – Rainford, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 17-Oct-2008
The claimant had been in England since he was 11, and was now 38. He had been repeatedly convicted. He had challenged a deportation notice on a human rights basis. He now challenged a certificate that this claim was manifestly ill founded.
Cited – EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 22-Oct-2008
The claimant challenged the respondent’s decision to order the return of herself and her son to Lebanon.
Held: The test for whether a claimant’s rights would be infringed to such an extent as to prevent their return home was a strict one, but . .
Cited – Norris v Government of United States of America SC 24-Feb-2010
The defendant faced extradition to the USA on charges of the obstruction of justice. He challenged the extradition on the basis that it would interfere with his article 8 rights to family life, given that the offence was merely ancillary, the result . .
Cited – ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 1-Feb-2011
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return . .
Cited – ETK v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 19-Apr-2011
The claimant appealed against refusal of an injunction to restrain the defendant newspaper from publishing his name in connection with a forthcoming article. The claimant had had an affair with a co-worker. Both were married. The relationship ended, . .
Cited – HH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa SC 20-Jun-2012
In each case the defendant sought to resist European Extradition Warrants saying that an order would be a disporportionate interference in their human right to family life. The Court asked whether its approach as set out in Norris, had to be amended . .
Cited – Zoumbas v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2013
The appellant challenged a decision that he did not qualify for asylum or humanitarian protection and that his further representations were not a fresh human rights claim under paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules. He argued that the return to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.270383

Beoku Betts v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Jul 2005

The appellant arrived aged 19 from Sierra Leone and was granted leave to enter as a student, which leave was extended. His famiy had been politically active and suffered abuse after a coup. When his leave expired he applied for asylum. Other family members had been granted indefinite leave. He appealed against the AIT’s refusal of his claim on the gound ‘as to the extent to which the position of the claimant’s family members was to be taken into account. There are apparently conflicting decisions by the tribunal in Kehinde . . and at first instance on judicial review by Jack J in AC [2003] EWHC 389 (Admin) which it is desirable the Court of Appeal should resolve’.
Held: Latham LJ said: ‘Under section 65 of [the 1999 Act], the right of appeal on human rights grounds requires consideration of the alleged breach of the appellant’s human rights. In the present case this required the adjudicator to concentrate on the effects of removal on the appellant. True it is, as Jack J said in R (AC) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal [2003] EWHC 389 (Admin) [2003] INLR 507, the effect on others might have an effect on an appellant, nonetheless it is the consequence to the appellant which is the relevant consequence. In the context of a merits appeal, which this was, the tribunal was entitled to conclude that the adjudicator had allowed his judgment to be affected unduly by the effect of removal on the remainder of the family in particular his mother. Further, the adjudicator does not suggest that the effect on the family, let alone the appellant, amounted to an exceptional circumstance.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke (Vice President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) Lord Justice Lloyd Lord Justice Latham

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 828

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – AC v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Admn 11-Mar-2003
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Beoku Betts v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 25-Jun-2008
The appellant had arrived from Sierra Leone and obtained student permits. When they expired he sought asylum, citing his family’s persecution after a coup, and that fact that other members of his family now had indefinite leave, and he said that an . .
Cited – Chikwamba v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 25-Jun-2008
The appellant had fled Zimbabwe. Though her asylum application was refused, she was not returned for the temporary suspension of such orders to Zimbabwe. In the meantime she married and had a child. She now appealed an order for her removal citing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.228230