IAT i If an appellant challenges a decision of the Secretary of State to revoke a refugee’s indefinite leave to remain because he has ceased to be a refugee for one of the reasons given in section 76(3) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 then the Secretary of State must prove that such … Continue reading RD (Cessation – Burden of Proof – Procedure) Algeria: IAT 26 Jun 2007
Challenge to imprisonment pending deportation of successful asylum applicant on release from prison after conviction of an offence specified under the 2004 Order as a particularly serious crime. Held: The appeal succeeded. ‘The giving of notice of the decision to make a deportation order, the making of the deportation order, and the detention on foot … Continue reading DN (Rwanda), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 26 Feb 2020
The respondent had listed criminal offences committed by the applicants in support of his decision to have them removed and returned home. Held: The appeal was allowed. The list provided included offences which were not of the serious nature required for inclusion in such a list, and the respondent had not properly allowed for the … Continue reading EN (Serbia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; KC (South Africa) v Same: CA 26 Jun 2009
The asylum applicant sought judicial review of interlocutory decisions of an immigration judge. The defendant said that there was a statutory procedure and that therefore that had to be followed rather than judicial review. Held: The application could go ahead. The application raised an issue of considerable importance. secion 103A had been introduced to speed … Continue reading AM (Cameroon), Regina (on the Application of) v Asylum and Immigration Tribunal: CA 21 Feb 2007
IAT (i) failed Turkish asylum-seekers who seek to rely on ‘standstill’ provisions under the Ankara Agreement of 1963 by virtue of engaging in business or being self-employed in the UK (even assuming they have received an appealable immigration decision) do not have an in-country right of appeal under the legislative framework in place on 1 … Continue reading SS and others (Ankara Agreement, No In-Country Right of Appeal) Turkey: IAT 29 Sep 2006
Judicial Review of a decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to certify his claim as ‘clearly unfounded’ in terms of section 94(2) of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 Citations: [2006] ScotCS CSOH – 78, [2006] CSOH 78 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: Scotland Immigration Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241820
(1) Section 117A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 requires the Upper Tribunal, in a judicial review involving Article 8(2) ECHR, to have regard to the considerations mentioned in section 117B and, where relevant, section 117C, when considering the question whether an interference with a person’s right to respect for private and family … Continue reading Khairdin, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (NIA 2002: Part 5A) (IJR): UTIAC 28 Nov 2014
IAT Prior to the Secretary of State’s decision and without notification to him, the Appellant changed her course of studies from that in respect of which the application had been made (paragraph 57(ii)(b) of HC 395 as amended) to one referable to paragraph 57(ii)(a )thereof. Held: (1) the nature of the change was such that … Continue reading TB (Student Application, Variation of Course, Effect) Jamaica: IAT 6 Apr 2006
(1) In determining pursuant to section 117C(6) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 whether there are very compelling circumstances, over and above those described in Exceptions 1 and 2 in subsections (4) and (5), such as to outweigh the public interest in the deportation of a foreign criminal, a court or tribunal must … Continue reading MS (S117C, : ‘Very Compelling Circumstances’) Philippines: UTIAC 4 Mar 2019
The claimants were dependants of Iraqi nationals killed in Iraq. Held: The Military Police were operating when Britain was an occupying power. The question in each case was whether the Human Rights Act applied to the acts of the defendant. The question amounted to whether the officers acted under State Agent Authority within the convention … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Mazin Mumaa Galteh Al-Skeini and Others) v The Secretary of State for Defence: CA 21 Dec 2005
(1) In KO (Nigeria) and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] UKSC 53, the approval by the Supreme Court of the test of ‘unduly harsh’ in section 117C(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, formulated by the Upper Tribunal in MK (Sierra Leone) v Secretary of State for the … Continue reading RA (S117C: ‘Unduly Harsh’; Offence: Seriousness) Iraq: UTIAC 4 Mar 2019
(1) Paragraph [D] of Appendix FM-SE is an example, within the context of the requirement to supply specified evidence, of the increasing influence of discretionary powers of waiver and further enquiry in the Immigration Rules. (2) Where applicants wish to invoke any discretion of this kind, they should do so when making the relevant application, … Continue reading Sultana and Others (Rules: Waiver/Further Enquiry; Discretion): UTIAC 12 Nov 2014
The court gave guidance on the powers available to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal as constituted under the 2002 Act. The powers were broadly those of the former Immigration Appeal tribunal. The Tribunal had power to admit new evidence after a demonstrated error. There is only limited scope for challenging a First-tier Tribunal’s findings of … Continue reading R (Iran) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 27 Jul 2005
The claimant had been in England since he was 11, and was now 38. He had been repeatedly convicted. He had challenged a deportation notice on a human rights basis. He now challenged a certificate that this claim was manifestly ill founded. Held: The certificate was quashed. The respondent was wrong to say that he … Continue reading Rainford, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 17 Oct 2008
Mitting J said: ‘The question which I have to consider is whether on the assumed facts I have recited the claimant cannot, on any view, succeed or her claim is so wholly lacking in substance that it is bound to fail.’ and ‘I have found this a far from easy question to answer. This case, … Continue reading Sinnarasa, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 19 May 2005
This case is reported for what we say about the exercise of the power to make directions to give effect to a determination, pursuant to the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and pursuant to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 ( as amended by the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004); … Continue reading EA (Family Visitor, Directions, Mistake of Fact, Unfairness) Ghana: IAT 1 Jun 2005
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 110 Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 96(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Administrative, immigration Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222932
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 61 Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 101(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222045
‘if an applicant for leave to remain raises a human rights ground for the first time after the refusal of his application on other grounds and in response to a request by the Secretary of State under section 120 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’), does the Secretary of State … Continue reading Shrestha and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 14 Dec 2018
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1219 Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 103C Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Nadarajah v Regina CACD 16-Nov-2007 The defendant appealed against a confiscation order made following his conviction for conspiracy to supply controlled drugs. . . Lists of cited by and citing cases may … Continue reading Hamid and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 25 Oct 2005
Judges: Longmore, Davis LJJ, Sir Stephen Sedley Citations: [2012] EWCA Civ 1436, [2013] INLR 456, [2012] WLR(D) 318, [2013] Imm AR 319, [2013] 1 WLR 1090 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 92(1) 92(4)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.465709
The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s certificate as to his asylum claim under s96(2). Held: The applicant had made a claim under human rights law. That had been rejected. He now sought to renew his application as an asylum claim, but on substantially the same facts. The respondent was free to give his … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Borak v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 30 Jul 2004
Judges: Stanley Burnton J Citations: [2004] EWHC 2054 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.201624
The applicant asylum seeker had had her application refused, and was awaiting a removal order. She had a child and asked the authority to house her pending her removal. Held: Provided she was not in breach of the removal order, the council had power to provide her with assistance. Though the authority had no duty … Continue reading M v London Borough of Islington and Another: CA 2 Apr 2004
The claimant had sought asylum on the day after arrival, and had therefore been refused any assistance beyond the provision of a list of charities who might assist. His lawyers were unable to secure either shelter or maintenance, and he had been left to sleep rough outside a police station. Held: The treatment amounted to … Continue reading Regina (Limbuela) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 4 Feb 2004
Citations: [2003] EWHC 2063 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality and Asylum Act 2002 94(3) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185813
The claimant appealed against refusal of judicial review. She had entered the UK, and applied for asylum. She was then found to have contracted a marriage of convenience, and thus become ineligible for support. She appealed and now sought housing assistance pending decision on her removal. The authority refused assistance on the basis that she … Continue reading K v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 31 Jul 2003
The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law. Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits to any asylum applicant who did not claim asylum immediately upon entry, was unfair. There … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 18 Mar 2003
The applicants’ claims for asylum had been rejected as bound to fail, and under the new Act, they were to be removed from the UK. If they wanted to appeal, they they would have to do so from outside the jurisdiction. The section had been brought into effect before the Act had been formally published. … Continue reading Regina (ZL and VL) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Chancellor’s Department: CA 24 Jan 2003
(i) ‘Removal’ in s84 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 refers to enforced removal pursuant to directions issued by the Secretary of State and not to the possibility of an individual making a voluntary return to their country of origin or a part of that country. (ii) A person (‘P’) who would be … Continue reading SA (Removal Destination; Iraq; Undertakings) Iraq: UTIAC 15 Nov 2021
The applicant sought admission to the UK. In the past he had made utterances which were capable of being racist. He claimed to have recanted, and had given undertakings as to his behaviour. At first instance it was held that the Home Secretary had failed to demonstrate an objective reason for refusing admission. It was … Continue reading Farrakhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Apr 2002
The appellant challenged decisions: first to refuse him indefinite leave to remain on grounds of 10 years’ lawful residence under paragraph 276B of the Immigration Rules; secondly, to refuse indefinite leave to remain on grounds of private and family life under paragraph 276ADE and Article 8 ECHR; and thirdly, to certify the human rights claim … Continue reading Agumba, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 6 Dec 2017
The meaning of ‘foreign criminal’ is not consistent over the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and the UK Borders Act 2007. Section 32 of the 2007 Act creates a designated class of offender that is a foreign criminal and establishes the consequences of such designation. That is, for the purposes of section 3(5)(a) of … Continue reading Zulfiqar (‘Foreign Criminal’ : British Citizen) Pakistan: UTIAC 11 Sep 2020
The claimant was born an Iraqi, but had been granted British Nationality. He was later detained in Iraq suspected of membership of a terrorist group. No charges were brought, and he complained that his article 5 rights were infringed. The defendant argued that UN resolution 1546 requiring it to maintain order in Iraq displaced the … Continue reading Al-Jedda, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: Admn 12 Aug 2005
Bail conditions only after detention B had been held under immigration detention, but released by SIAC, purportedly in conditional bail, after they found there was no realistic prospect of his deportation because he had not disclosed his true identity. The court was asked ‘whether there exists a power under the 1971 Act to grant immigration … Continue reading B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 8 Feb 2018
The court was asked as to the extent of the power of the IAT and Court of Appeal to reconsider a decision which it later appeared was based upon an error of fact, and the extent to which new evidence to demonstrate such an error could be admitted. Held: The view that appeals were restricted … Continue reading E v Secretary of State for the Home Department etc: CA 2 Feb 2004
Judicial review of a decision by the Secretary of State for the Home Department to certify the petitioner’s asylum and human rights claims as clearly unfounded in terms of section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Citations: [2017] ScotCS CSOH – 3 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: Scotland Immigration Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Kadir, Re Judicial Review: SCS 18 Jan 2017
Claim for judicial review began as a challenge to the lawfulness of directions to remove the claimant from the United Kingdom. It now stands as a challenge to the defendant’s decision to certify the claimant’s human rights claim (article 8 of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) as … Continue reading Yarbo, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 9 Jul 2014
(1) A person who has been deported under a deportation order that remains in force is a person who is liable to deportation within the meaning of section 3 of the Immigration Act 1971 and is therefore unable to bring himself within section 117B(6) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. (2) By the … Continue reading Williams (Scope of ‘Liable To Deportation’) Nigeria: UTIAC 2 Mar 2018
(i) A human rights appeal under section 82(1)(b) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘NIAA 2002’) can be determined only through the provisions of the ECHR; usually Article 8. (ii) A person whose human rights claim turns on Article 8 will not be able to advance any criticism of the Secretary of State’s … Continue reading Charles (Human Rights Appeal: Scope) Grenada: UTIAC 1 Feb 2018
1. If, at a hearing, the Tribunal is satisfied that a matter which an appellant wishes to raise is a new matter, which by reason of section 85(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, the Tribunal may not consider unless the Secretary of State has given consent, and, in pursuance of the Secretary … Continue reading Quaidoo (New Matter: Procedure/Process) Ghana: UTIAC 1 Feb 2018
Extant Appeal: S94B Challenge: Forum – (1) Where an appellant’s appeal has been certified under section 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and the appellant has been removed from the United Kingdom pursuant to that certificate, the First-tier Tribunal is the forum for determining whether, in all the circumstances, the appeal can … Continue reading Watson, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: UTIAC 5 Apr 2018
(1) A notice of removal window (Form RED.0004 (fresh)) is not an EEA decision for the purposes of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006. The notice cannot accordingly be appealed under those Regulations. Even if it could constitute a decision, the notice of removal window will constitute an EEA decision only if it concerns … Continue reading Ahmad (Scope of Appeals) Pakistan: UTIAC 23 Jan 2018
The appeal raises two issues: first, whether the application made by the first appellant was properly characterised as a human rights claim for the purposes of s.94(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002; and second whether the decision on the application was void or nullified on the grounds of illegality? Citations: [2018] EWCA … Continue reading Joshi and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 15 May 2018
Challenge to the defendant’s decision to detain him, deport him and to certify his human rights claim under section 94B of the 2002 Act on the basis that although the appeals process for that claim has not been exhausted, removal of the claimant to Nigeria pending the outcome of the appeal would not be unlawful … Continue reading Adesanya, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 20 May 2016
Judges: Foskett J Citations: [2010] EWHC 704 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2) 94(3) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Immigration Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.406635
The Immigration Appeal Tribunal allowed the respondent’s appeal against the adjudicator’s decision. The claimant appealed that finding. Held: The jurisdiction of the IAT was now restricted to issues of law. The respondents submissions to the contrary were plainly inconsistent with this legislation. Judges: Mummery, Laws LJJ, Sir Martin Nourse Citations: Times 03-Aug-2004 Statutes: Nationality, Immigration … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 20 Jul 2004
Citations: [2003] EWHC 2369 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Regina (on the application of L and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 2003 The court considered the circumstances under which a certificate that an asylum claim was clearly … Continue reading Atkinson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 10 Oct 2003
The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day following their arrival. Held: The appeal by the Secretary of State … Continue reading Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same: HL 3 Nov 2005
The claimant sought to impugn a decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department (the Secretary of State) rejecting the claimant’s fresh claim assertions and certifying the claim as ‘clearly unfounded’ pursuant to section 94(2) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Judges: His Honour Judge Jeremy Richardson QC (Sitting as a … Continue reading SN, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 24 Feb 2014
The claimant challenged the lawfulness of a decision of the defendant of 9 August 2013 to certify his asylum and human rights claims as clearly unfounded under section 94(2) of the 2002 Act. Judges: Gill DHCJ Citations: [2014] EWHC 3725 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Khan, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 17 Nov 2014
Paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules 1. The importance of paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules (‘Paragraph 353’) is as a ‘gate-keeping’ function to shut out from the appeals system unmeritorious second or subsequent appeals. An appeal is generated under the current form of section 82 Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’) … Continue reading Akber, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Paragraph 353, Tribunal’s Role): UTIAC 27 Sep 2021
(1) By virtue of schedule 2(1) of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2016 (‘the 2016 Regs’) a ‘new matter’ in section 85(6) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 includes not only a ground of appeal of a kind listed in section 84 but also an EEA ground of appeal. (2) The effect of the … Continue reading Oksuzoglu (EEA Appeal – ‘New Matter’): UTIAC 17 Oct 2018
Human rights appeals (1) In a human rights appeal under section 82(1)(b) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, a finding that a person (P) satisfies the requirements of a particular immigration rule, so as to be entitled to leave to remain, means that (provided Article 8 of the ECHR is engaged), the Secretary … Continue reading OA and Others (Human Rights; ‘New Matter’; S120 : Nigeria): UTIAC 15 Jan 2019
(1) If, on appeal, an issue arises as to whether the removal of a person (P) from the United Kingdom would be unlawful because P is a British citizen, the tribunal deciding the appeal must make a finding on P’s citizenship; just as the tribunal must do so where the consideration of the public interest … Continue reading MS (British Citizenship; EEA Appeals) Belgium: UTIAC 15 Oct 2019
1. Following the amendment to s 82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’), effective from 20 October 2014, a previous decision made by the Competent Authority within the National Referral Mechanism (made on the balance of probabilities) is not of primary relevance to the determination of an asylum appeal, despite … Continue reading ES (S82 Nia 2002, Negative NRM): UTIAC 6 Sep 2018
If a parent (‘P’) is unable to demonstrate he / she has been taking an active role in a child’s upbringing for the purposes of E-LTRPT.2.4 of the Immigration Rules, P may still be able to demonstrate a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with a qualifying child for the purposes of section 117B(6) of the … Continue reading SR (Subsisting Parental Relationship, S117B,): UTIAC 5 Sep 2018
If an appellant relies upon criteria that relate to a different category of the Immigration Rules to make good his Article 8 claim from that relied upon in his application for LTR on human rights grounds or in his s.120 statement such that a new judgment falls to be made as to whether or not … Continue reading AK and IK (S85 NIAA 2002 – New Matters : Turkey): UTIAC 1 Feb 2019
(1) The compelling reasons proviso in article 1C(5) of the 1951 Refugee Convention, as amended, applies in the UK only to refugees under article 1A(1) of the Convention. (2) Changes in a refugee’s country of origin affecting only part of the country may, in principle, lead to cessation of refugee status, albeit it is difficult … Continue reading AMA (Article 1C(5) – Proviso – Internal Relocation): UTIAC 12 Nov 2018
(i) The power conferred on the Upper Tribunal, exercisable upon remittal to the First-tier Tribunal, by section 12(b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 to give directions is distinct from the power conferred by section 12(3)(b) to give procedural directions. (ii) Directions under section 12(b)(i) encompass matters such as guidance on the law … Continue reading ONM (Remittal To UKFTT With Directions): UTIAC 17 Aug 2015
(i) While the two fold duties enshrined in section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 are imposed on the Secretary of State, the onus of making representations and providing relevant evidence relating to a child’s best interests rests on the appropriate parental figure. (ii) A failure to discharge this onus may well … Continue reading Ahmed and Others (Deprivation of Citizenship) (Pakistan): UTIAC 10 Feb 2017
i) Article 13 of the Immigration (Leave to enter and Remain) Order 2000/1161 (the ‘2000 Order’) applies to holders of indefinite leave to remain (‘ILR’) who travel to a country or territory outside the common travel area so that their ILR does not lapse but continues if Article 13(2)-(4) are satisfied. ii) If the leave … Continue reading Neshanthan (Cancellation or Revocation of ILR : Sri Lanka): UTIAC 17 Jan 2017
Fairness requires the Secretary of State to give an applicant an opportunity to address grounds for refusal, of which he did not know and could not have known, failing which the resulting decision may be set aside on appeal as contrary to law (without contravening the provisions of s. 85A of the Nationality, Asylum and … Continue reading Naved (Student – Fairness – Notice of Points) Pakistan: UTIAC 13 Jan 2012
i) A decision on an application under rule 134 of the Immigration Rules for indefinite leave to remain is a not a points-based decision to which s.85A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 as amended by s.19 of the UK Borders Act 2007 applies. ii) Post decision evidence of a back-dated wage increase … Continue reading Philipson (ILR – Not PBS: Evidence) India: UTIAC 6 Jan 2012
1. The strength or otherwise of an underlying Article 8 case is relevant to a decision by the respondent whether to certify a case under s.94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, in that it may disclose a case without a specific case being advanced by the applicant as to why temporary separation … Continue reading JT, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (S94B Niaa 2002 Certification) (IJR): UTIAC 28 Aug 2015
UTIAC (1) The seventh of the principles in the Zoumbas code does not preclude an outcome whereby the best interests of a child must yield to the public interest. (2) This approach has not been altered by Part 5A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. (3) In the proportionality balancing exercise, the best … Continue reading Kaur (Children’s Best Interests / Public Interest Interface): UTIAC 10 Jan 2017
Statutory right of appeal against decisions by the Secretary of State for the Home Department to refuse protection claims and human rights claims under Part 5 of the 2002 Act. Where a person has already had a human rights claim refused and there is no pending appeal, do further submissions that rely on human rights … Continue reading Robinson (Formerly JR (Jamaica)) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 13 Mar 2019
UTIAC (1) As held in Deliallisi (British citizen: deprivation appeal: scope) [2013] UKUT 439 (IAC), in an appeal under section 40A of the British Nationality Act 1981 the Tribunal is required to determine the reasonably foreseeable consequences of deprivation. (2) Whilst the Tribunal considering a section 40A appeal cannot pre-judge the outcome of any future … Continue reading AB (British Citizenship: Deprivation; Deliallisi Considered) Nigeria: UTIAC 28 Sep 2016
UTIAC The purpose and intention of Parliament in incorporating section 117C of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 was to ensure that all of the criminal convictions providing a reason for the deportation decision are to be examined within the framework provided by that section. What is required when undertaking the exercise required by … Continue reading Rexha (S117C – Earlier Offences : Albania): UTIAC 5 Jul 2016
(i) The requirements in para 399(b) are conjunctive. Accordingly, the correct approach is to consider para 399(b)(i) before the requirements in para 399(b)(ii) and (iii). If para 399(b)(i) is not satisfied, there is no need to consider the issues of undue hardship in para 399(b)(ii) and (iii). The offender would then have to rely upon … Continue reading Terrelonge (Para 399(B)): UTIAC 3 Nov 2015
UTIAC (i) Section 117B (6) is a reflection of the distinction which Parliament has chosen to make between persons who are, and who are not, liable to deportation. In any case where the conditions enshrined in section 117B(6) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 are satisfied, the section 117B(6) public interest prevails over … Continue reading Treebhawon and Others (Section 117B): UTIAC 19 Nov 2015
UTIAC That section 117C of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 is applicable only in deportation cases is made clear in section 117A(2) which, in directing the court or tribunal to the considerations involved when looking at the public interest question, clearly distinguishes between those cases that involve deportation from those that do not. … Continue reading Clarke (Section 117C – Limited To Deportation): UTIAC 22 Oct 2015
UTIAC (1) Lord Neuberger’s judgment in R (ZA (Nigeria)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 926 is an authoritative pronouncement on the scope of the Supreme Court’s judgments in R (BA (Nigeria)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] UKSC 7. (2) Parliament’s actions in amending paragraph 353 … Continue reading Hussein, Regina (on The Application of) v First-Tier Tribunal (Para 353: Present Scope and Effect)(IJR): UTIAC 8 Aug 2016
UTIAC 1. A decision that further submissions do not amount to a ‘fresh claim’ under para 353 of the Immigration Rules is not a decision to refuse a protection or human rights claim and so does not give rise to a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal under s.82 of the Nationality, Immigration and … Continue reading MG, Regina (on The Application of) v First-Tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (‘Fresh Claim’; Para 353: No Appeal) (IJR): UTIAC 17 May 2016
The claimant sought asylum. The respondent on her appeal certified that the claim was clearly unfounded. The House was asked how further submissions might be made and what approach should be taken on a request for judicial review of such a decision. The respondent said that the limitation on further applications while ‘appeal relating to … Continue reading ZT (Kosovo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 4 Feb 2009
UTIAC 1. The current statutory appeal regime requires a decision to be made on a human rights claim. Without a claim and without a decision there is no appeal. 2. Where a claim has already been determined, submissions made subsequent to that require a decision as to whether they amount to a claim. Paragraph 353 … Continue reading Waqar, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Statutory Appeals/Paragraph 353) ( IJR): UTIAC 25 Mar 2015
UTIAC 1. Notwithstanding the amendments brought about by the Immigration Act 2014 to the types of decisions appealable under s82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, para 353 of HC395 continues to perform a gateway function in respect of access to a right of appeal. Arguments to the contrary, founded upon dicta in … Continue reading Robinson, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Paragraph 353 – Waqar Applied) (IJR): UTIAC 16 Feb 2016
UTIAC 1. That ‘precariousness’ is a criterion of relevance to family life as well as private life cases is an established part of Article 8 jurisprudence: see e.g. R (Nagre) v SSHD [2013] EWHC 720 (Admin) and Jeunesse v Netherlands, app.no.12738/10 (GC). 2. The ‘little weight’ provisions of s.117B(4)(a) and (5) of the Nationality, Immigration … Continue reading Rajendran (S117B – Family Life): UTIAC 7 Mar 2016
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious faiths. Held: A distinction was to be made between domestic cases involving actions within … Continue reading Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004
The claimants challenged the rules disallowing their appeal against a decision for their expulsion as unconducive to the public good, unless made ‘out of country’, saying that this infringed their human rights to private and family life. Held: The appeals succeeded. Each had served terms of imprisonment for drugs related offences. Richards, Elias, McCombee LJJ … Continue reading Kiarie, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 13 Oct 2015
UTIAC The Immigration Rules, when applied in the context of the deportation of a foreign criminal, are a complete code. Where an assessment is required to be made as to whether a person meets the requirements of para 399 of the Immigration Rules, as that comprises an assessment of that person’s claim under article 8 … Continue reading KMO (Section 117 – Unduly Harsh): UTIAC 25 Sep 2015
UTIAC (i) Sections 117A and 117B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 are not confined to an appeal under section 84(1)(c). They apply also to appeals brought under section 84(1)(a) and (g). (ii) Section 117B(4) and (5) of the 2002 Act, which instruct Judges to attribute ‘little weight’ to the considerations specified therein, … Continue reading Deelah and Others (Section 117B – Ambit): UTIAC 30 Jul 2015
1. For courts and tribunals, the coming into force of Part 5A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (ss.117A-D) has not altered the need for a two-stage approach to Article 8 claims. 2. Ordinarily a court or tribunal will, as a first stage, consider an appellant’s Article 8 claim by reference to the … Continue reading Bossade (Ss117A-D-Interrelationship With Rules): UTIAC 16 Jul 2015
(i) The public interest in firm immigration control is not diluted by the consideration that a person pursuing a claim under Article 8 ECHR has at no time been a financial burden on the state or is self-sufficient or is likely to remain so indefinitely. The significance of these factors is that where they are … Continue reading Forman (SS 117A-C Considerations): UTIAC 19 Jun 2015
Challenge to respondent’s decision that claimants application for asylum was clearly unfounded. His Honour Judge Gilbart QC, Honorary Recorder of Manchester, Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge [2012] EWHC 2575 (Admin) Bailii Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2) England and Wales Immigration Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.464852
B, an homosexual immigrant for Jamaica, resisted his return, saying that he would be prosecuted. The Secretary of State now appealed against a finding that his inclusion of Jamaica within the statutory list of safe countries for return was not rational. Held: The appeal failed. Homosexual, bisexual and transsexual people in Jamaica were at risk … Continue reading Brown (Jamaica), Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 4 Mar 2015
(1) An appellant in an Article 8 human rights appeal who argues that there is no public interest in removal because after leaving the UK he or she will be granted entry clearance must, in all cases, address the relevant considerations in Part 5A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’) … Continue reading Younas (Section 117B, (B); Chikwamba; Zambrano) Pakistan: UTIAC 24 Mar 2020
Communicated Case – The applicant, a Kosovan Gorani, had been granted refugee status and indefinite leave to remain, but after conviction for criminal damage and drugs offences and possession of a knife in a public place he was sentenced, and after completion of his sentence he was ordered to be departed. The offences were included … Continue reading Draga v The United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Jan 2015
Extra Division – Inner House – the respondent referred to a letter dated 20 December 2012 from the petitioner’s solicitors. In that letter, the solicitors contended that to require the petitioner to leave the United Kingdom, and thus be forced to apply for entry clearance from abroad, would breach her family and private life rights … Continue reading LWF (Ap) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SCS 24 Sep 2014
UTIAC (1) The appealable decision that s 32(5) of the UK Borders Act 2007 applies is not invalid by reason of being dated after the deportation order to which it relates. (2) In an appeal against automatic deportation there is no appeal against a decision to deport or against the order to deport, but only … Continue reading Greenwood (Automatic Deportation: Order of Events): UTIAC 15 Jul 2014
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The treaty was intended to encourage bilateral trading … Continue reading Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005
Judicial Review of a decision by the Secretary of State for the Home Department made on 25 November 2013 to certify in terms of section 96(2) of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 an application made by the petitioner for the revocation of a deportation order [2014] ScotCS CSOH – 85 Bailii Scotland Immigration … Continue reading TN (Ap), Re Judicial Review: SCS 14 May 2014
UTIAC (1) A jurisdictional decision of the First-tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber, contained in a determination made after the appeal has passed the duty judge ‘screening’ stage, is appealable to the Upper Tribunal: Practice Statement 3.4; Abiyat and others (Rights of appeal) [2011] UKUT 314 (IAC). (2) Where the First-tier Tribunal has refused to … Continue reading Ved and Another (Appealable Decisions; Permission Applications; Basnet) (Tanzania): UTIAC 27 Mar 2014
Lord Stewart [2014] ScotCS CSOH – 52 Bailii Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 96(2) Scotland, Immigration Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.522572
1. Paragraph A398 of the immigration rules governs each of the rules in Part 14 that follows it. The expression ‘foreign criminal’ in paragraph A398 is to be construed by reference to the definition of that expression in section 117D of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002: OLO and Others (para 398 – ‘foreign … Continue reading SC (Paras A398 – 339D: ‘Foreign Criminal’: Procedure) Albania: UTIAC 27 Apr 2020
The claimant appealed against rejection of his request for judicial review of a adecision of the respondent not to revoke a deportation order. Held: The appeal failed. Moore-Bick, Tomplinson, McCombe LJJ [2014] EWCA Civ 88, [2014] 2 All ER 973, [2014] WLR(D) 60, [2014] 1 WLR 3173, [2014] Imm AR 768 Bailii, WLRD Nationality Immigration … Continue reading Khan v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 11 Feb 2014
UTIAC (i) An appeal under section 82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 requires there to be an immigration decision, as there defined. Where no immigration decision has been made, the First-tier Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. (ii) Judges considering an appeal (or applications for permission to appeal) should ensure … Continue reading Singh (No Immigration Decision- Jurisdiction) India: UTIAC 6 Sep 2013
UTIAC (1) An appeal under section 40A of the British Nationality Act 1981 against a decision to deprive a person of British citizenship requires the Tribunal to consider whether the Secretary of State’s discretionary decision to deprive should be exercised differently. This will involve (but not be limited to) ECHR Article 8 issues, as well … Continue reading Deliallisi (British Citizen: Deprivation Appeal: Scope) Albania: UTIAC 30 Aug 2013
1. The definition of ‘qualifying child’ contained in section 117D(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 does not include an EU citizen child resident in the United Kingdom for less than seven years. 2. The non-inclusion of EU citizen children resident for less than seven years in the definition of ‘qualifying child’ does … Continue reading MM (Section 117B – EU Citizen Child): UTIAC 8 Jun 2020
UTIAC 1. Appeals can be brought under section 83 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (so called ‘upgrade’ appeals’) only on the grounds that removing the appellant from the United Kingdom would breach the United Kingdom’s obligations under the Refugee Convention (see section 84(3)) or that the appellant is entitled to humanitarian protection … Continue reading ST (Child Asylum Seekers) Sri Lanka: UTIAC 25 Jun 2013