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 Justice said that even if they were acting in an administrative capacity, they were under a duty to act fairly – meaning that they should give the immigrant an opportunity of satisfying them that he was under 16. Part of the duty to provide a fair hearing includes disclosure to a party of prejudicial information, in order that the party may respond.
Judges:
Lord Parker LCJ
Citations:
[1967] 2 QB 617, (1967) 111 Sol Jo 296, [1967] 2 WLR 962, [1967] 1 All ER 226
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration, Administrative
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.516250