(1) There can be little doubt that, in enacting the UK Borders Act 2007, Parliament views the object of deporting those with a criminal record as a very strong policy, which is constant in all cases (SS (Nigeria) v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 550). The weight to be attached to that object will, however, include a variable component, which reflects the criminality in issue. Nevertheless, Parliament has tilted the scales strongly in favour of deportation and for them to return to the level and then swing in favour of a criminal opposing deportation there must be compelling reasons, which must be exceptional.
(2) What amounts to compelling reasons or exceptional circumstances is very much fact dependent but must necessarily be seen in the context of the articulated will of Parliament in favour of deportation.
(3) Where the facts surrounding an individual who has committed a crime are said to be ‘exceptional’ or ‘compelling’, these are factors to be placed in the weighing scale, in order to be weighed against the public interest.
(4) In some other instances, the phrase ‘exceptional’ or ‘compelling’ has been used to describe the end result: namely, that the position of the individual is ‘exceptional’ or ‘compelling’ because, having weighed the unusual facts against the (powerful) public interest, the former outweighs the latter. In this sense ‘exceptional’ or ‘compelling’ is the end result of the proportionality weighing process.
Citations:
[2014] UKUT 315 (IAC)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Immigration
Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.536208
