The Court asked: ‘1(a) Is a person who is outside his country of origin and recognised as a refugee, and who has subsequent to that recognition taken on the nationality of the host country, still a refugee within the meaning of the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees?
(b) If such a person does cease to be a refugee, does his refugee status cease only following a procedural process, or automatically by operation of law?
2. What is the effect, if any, of Directives 2004/83/EC and 2005/85/EC on these cases?
3. Do paragraphs 352A (relating to spouses) and 352D (relating to dependant children) apply to a person who was recognised as a refugee and is now a British citizen?’
Held: The court rejected the appellants’ submission that paras 352A and 352D applied. It also rejected their case under Article 8 of the ECHR. As to 3), the references to ‘asylum’ and ‘refugee’ were directed to a status of the sponsor that was current and accepted. As to 1 and 2, after a re-statement of them, Laws LJ answered ‘No’ and that it was open to a State Party to the Refugee Convention to prescribe the procedures under which cessation of refugee status pursuant to Article 1C(3) would have effect but that, if a State Party had not done so, cessation would occur automatically. The directive had not laid down a procedure.
Judges:
Laws, Rix and Wilson LJJ
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Civ 1420
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – ZN (Afghanistan) and Others v Entry Clearance Officer (Karachi) SC 12-May-2010
The Court was asked what rules apply to family members seeking entry to the United Kingdom, where the sponsor was given asylum and then obtained British citizenship. The ECO had said that the ordinary family members rules applied, where the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278948