Appeal against deportation order. He court was asked: ‘(1) Did the Secretary of State err in deciding to deport the appellant under the mandatory power conferred by section 32 of the 2007 Act?
(2) Did the Upper Tribunal err in law in failing to find that the Secretary of State and First-tier Tribunal had erred in law and in refusing to set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal?
(3) Did the Upper Tribunal err contrary to section 6 of the Human Rights Act in failing to set aside the decision to deport in the absence of any tangible evidence for any article 8(2) justification of the encroachment of the article 8 rights of the appellant’s children in circumstances where the Tribunal had not been specifically asked to address this point by the parties?’
Held: The appeal failed.
On the first issue the Court of Appeal concluded that section 32 played no part in the Secretary of State’s decision. Had it done so, it would have been unnecessary to consider para 396 of the Immigration Rules and the decision letter had made it abundantly clear that this had been taken into account – para 35 of the court’s judgment. The first ground of appeal was therefore dismissed.
The factors amply supported the conclusion that the appellant’s deportation was conducive to the public good. As to the delay this could be important but not in this case.
The court rejected the suggestion that there should have been further investigation of the impact that the deportation of the appellant might have on the lives of his children, observing that ‘these children did not require the disruption of further investigation in circumstances where a court with appropriate jurisdiction had made important decisions in relation to their welfare’.
Judges:
Morgan LCJ, Coghlin LJ and Gillen LJ
Citations:
[2014] NICA 86
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
Northern Ireland
Cited by:
Appeal from – Makhlouf v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
(Northern Ireland) The appellant (born in Tunisia) was made subject to a deportation order. He had married a UK citizen and they had a child. After moving to the UK, at various times, the relationship broke down and he was convicted of several . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration, Human Rights
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.552629