The court considered the power of the Secretary of State for the Home Department and her immigration officials to impose conditions of curfew and electronic monitoring on those who have been released from immigration detention pending the conclusion of deportation proceedings.
Held: Paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the 1971 Act did not empower the Secretary of State to impose a curfew by way of a restriction under that paragraph.
Judges:
Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Black, Gross LJJ
Citations:
[2016] EWCA Civ 409, [2016] WLR(D) 263, [2016] 4 WLR 93
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Gedi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 9-Oct-2015
Application for Judicial Review challenging the lawfulness of bail conditions (a curfew monitored by electronic tagging) imposed by the defendant during deportation proceedings under section 32(5) of the 2007 Act. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Majera, Regina (on The Application of v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Oct-2021
The Court was asked whether the Government can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the order. The appellant had been . .
Cited – Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department SC 12-Feb-2020
Claim for damages for false imprisonment brought in judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of a curfew imposed upon the claimant, purportedly under paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971.
Held: The Court of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.564448