Category: Immigration

T and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 21 Dec 2010

The court was asked whether an unaccompanied minor not having a relevant family member legally present in any European Union Member State, comes to the United Kingdom and claims asylum having previously claimed asylum in another Member State, was liable to be removed under Article 6 of Council Regulation EC 343/2003 (‘Dublin II’) to the Member State where the an unaccompanied minor first lodged his or her application?
Davis J
[2010] EWHC 3572 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.443599

Sino, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 25 Aug 2011

The Claimant an Algerian subject to a deportation order, sought a declaration that he had been unlawfully detained; that any further detention would be unlawful, and damages for false imprisonment and for breach of his rights under article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
John Howell QC J
[2011] EWHC 2249 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.443301

IA, Re Leave To Appeal: SCS 1 Apr 2011

Extra Division, Inner House – The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal rejecting his appeals. The latter decision dismissed the applicant’s appeal against a decision of the respondent, the Home Secretary which refused to grant the applicant asylum or humanitarian protection and determined that he should be removed from the United Kingdom as an illegal immigrant.
The applicant claimed before the tribunal that requiring him to leave the United Kingdom . . would be a breach of the United Kingdom’s obligations under the Geneva Convention of 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees, as amended by the protocol to the Convention 1967 (collectively the Refugee Convention) and would be unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, as being incompatible with the appellant’s rights under the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR).
Lord Clarke said: ‘While UNHCR decisions as to status . . have no binding legal effect, they are to be treated with great respect in the interests of legal diplomacy and comity having regard to their source. The mind of the decision maker, in this jurisdiction, where an applicant can lay claim to UNHCR status, as a given datism, must in its decision making process not lose sight of that fact in reaching its disposal of the case before it. A decision of the UNHCR on refugee status will be a very important piece of evidence throughout the decision maker’s journey. But it has ultimately no greater claim than that and, if the other material before the decision maker leads him/her to considerations that point cogently against the conclusion arrived at by the UNHCR, then the decision maker is fully justified in departing from the latter conclusion.’
Lady Paton, Lord Clarke, Lord Emslie
[2011] ScotCS CSIH – 28, 2011 GWD 14-344, 2011 SLT 706, [2011] CSIH 28
Bailii
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 103B, Geneva Convention of 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees, European Convention on Human Rights
Scotland
Cited by:
Leave – 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.
Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.431765

De Verteuil v The Hon Samuel William Knaggs Acting Governor and Another: PC 21 Mar 1918

(Trinidad and Tobago) the Governor of Trinidad was entitled to remove immigrants from an estate ‘on sufficient ground shewn to his satisfaction ‘.
Held: Lord Parmoor said that ‘the acting Governor was not called upon to give a decision on an appeal between parties, and it is not suggested that he holds the position of a judge or that the appellant is entitled to insist on the forms used in ordinary judicial procedure , but he had a duty of giving to any person against whom the complaint is made a fair opportunity to make any relevant statement which he may desire to bring forward and a fair opportunity to correct or controvert any relevant statement brought forward to his prejudice’.
Lord Parmoor
[1918] UKPC 29
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Ridge v Baldwin (No 1) HL 14-Mar-1963
No Condemnation Without Opportunity For Defence
Ridge, a Chief Constable, had been wrongfully dismissed because he was not given the opportunity of presenting his defence. He had been acquitted of the charges brought against him, but the judge at trial had made adverse comments about his . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.423400

Schmidt and Another v Secretary of State for Home Affairs: CA 19 Dec 1968

The plaintiffs had come to England to study at a college run by the Church of Scientology, and now complained that their student visas had not been extended so as to allow them to complete their studies. They said that the decision had been made for improper reasons. They now appealed against an order striking out their claim.
Held: The appeal failed (Russell LJ dissenting). The action was unsustainable. Had there been a duty to act fairly, there was nothing to say that the respondent had not so acted.
Widgery LJ said: ‘ here is some difference of opinion as to the right under the Prerogative to deport aliens already here, but I do not understand it to be said in any way that the opportunity to land initially is one which cannot be refused arbitrarily, and that position is now made clear, if it was not made clear before, by the Aliens Order of 1953. Accordingly, when an alien approaching this country is refused leave to land, he has no right capable of being infringed in such a way as to enable him to come to this Court for the purpose of assistance, and, since he has no kind of right or interest capable of being infringed or affected, the considerations urged by Mr. Hogg could not affect such a case at all. In such a situation the alien’s desire to land can be rejected for good reason or bad, for sensible reason or fanciful or for no reason at all. ‘
Lord Denning MR, Russell, Widgery LJJ
[1969] 2 WLR 337, [1969] 2 Ch 149, [1968] EWCA Civ 1, (1969) 133 JP 274, [1969] 1 All ER 904
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rex v Port of London Authority 1919
A tribunal may, in the honest exercise of its discretion, adopt a policy, and announce it to those concerned, so long as it is ready to listen to reasons why, in an exceptional case, that policy should not be applied. . .
Cited – Rex v Leman Street Police Station Inspector, ex parte Venicoff 1920
The Aliens Order of 1919 empowered the Secretary of State to make a deportation order against an alien if he deemed it to be conducive to the public good. The Home Secretary had expressed no concluded view that the critical allegations, namely . .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, ex parte Soblen CA 1963
Lord Denning MR discussed a decision to deport the applicant. The validity of the Minister’s act: ‘depends on the purpose with which the act is done.: ‘If it was done for an authorised purpose, it was lawful. If it was done professedly for an . .
Cited – Ridge v Baldwin (No 1) HL 14-Mar-1963
No Condemnation Without Opportunity For Defence
Ridge, a Chief Constable, had been wrongfully dismissed because he was not given the opportunity of presenting his defence. He had been acquitted of the charges brought against him, but the judge at trial had made adverse comments about his . .
Cited – in re HK (an Infant) QBD 1967
A Commonwealth citizen had a right to be admitted to this country if he was (as this party claimed to be) under the age of 16. The immigration officers were not satisfied that he was under 16 and refused him admission.
Held: The Lord Chief . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 October 2021; Ref: scu.262783