The claimants applications had been decided under a fast track procedure since ruled ultra vires. Held: The decisions remained valid. Sharp, Peter Jackson, Singh LJJ [2018] EWCA Civ 2838, [2018] WLR(D) 787 Bailii, WLRD Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 106 England and Wales Immigration Updated: 12 November 2021; Ref: scu.631420
The three respondents had fled persecution in Darfur. They sought asylum which was refused, and they now appealed. It was argued that whilst they had a well founded fear of persecution in Dhafur, that would not apply if they returned to Khartoum. The AIT had found that it would not be unreasonable for them to … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v AH (Sudan) and others: HL 14 Nov 2007
The claimant challenged fines imposed on him after three illegal immigrants were found to have hidden in his lorry in the immigration control zone at Dunkirk. The 1999 At was to have been amended by the 2002 Act, and the implementation was by the 2002 Order. That Order was now said to be ineffective. Held: … Continue reading Bogdanic v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: QBD 29 Aug 2014
IAT Each application on behalf of the respondent for the section 108, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act, 2002 procedure to be invoked must be decided on its own merits. Immigration Judges should first consider whether it is being alleged that the document concerned is a forgery, or whether it is simply asserted that it is … Continue reading OA (Alleged Forgery; Section 108 Procedure) Nigeria: IAT 27 Nov 2007
The authority had to decide the age of the applicant, an asylum seeker, in order to decide whether a duty was owed to him under the Act. He complained that the procedure adopted was unfair. The 2002 Act did not apply to persons under 18, and he would be entitled to assistance from the respondent. … Continue reading Regina (B) v Merton London Borough Council: Admn 14 Jul 2003
UTIAC (1) Rule 17 (withdrawal) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 does not enable the Upper Tribunal to withhold consent to the withdrawal by the Secretary of State of the decision against which a person appealed to the First-tier Tribunal. (2) Where such a decision is withdrawn in appellate proceedings before the Immigration … Continue reading SM (Withdrawal of Appealed Decision: Effect) (Pakistan): UTIAC 11 Feb 2014
Return To UK to fight Citizenship Withdrawal The appellant had, as a 15 year old, left to go to Iraq to be the ISIL terrorist group. She married an ISIL fighter and they had three children, the last one dying. Her citizenship of the UK had been withdrawn by the respondent leaving an entitlement to … Continue reading Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Others: CA 16 Jul 2020
UTIAC 1. A decision to certify a person’s (P’s) removal under regulation 24AA of the European Economic Area Regulations 2006 operates as a temporary measure that can be applied only for so long as there is a statutory appeal which could be brought in time or which is pending. 2. Regulation 24AA is a discretionary … Continue reading Masalskas, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Regulations 24Aa and 29Aa EEA Regs) (IJR): UTIAC 26 Nov 2015
The appellant, a Palestinian, challenged the involvement of Lady Cosgrove as a judge in her case, saying that Lady Cosgrove’s involvement as a jew in pro-Jewish lobby organisations meant that there was an appearance of bias. The applicant had sought asylum, saying that she had fled Palestine after taking legal action against the president of … Continue reading Helow v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: HL 22 Oct 2008
The two applicants had been detained by the armed forces in Iraq suspected of murder. They sought release before being transferred to the civilian authorities for trial saying that the trials would not be fair. The respondent denied that the applicants were within the jurisdiction of the court for this purpose, but merely being held … Continue reading Al-Saadoon and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: Admn 19 Dec 2008
Application for judicial review of defendant’s decision that the claimant’s claim that his removal from the UK would be a disproportionate interference with his human rights was manifestly ill founded. Andrews QC J [2011] EWHC 157 (Admin) Bailii e Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94 England and Wales Immigration Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: … Continue reading Mamaniat, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 24 Jan 2011
Meaning of ’caused serious harm’ (A) section 117D(2)(b)(ii): ’caused serious harm’ The current case law on ’caused serious harm’ for the purposes of the expression ‘foreign criminal’ in Part 5A of the 2002 Act can be summarised as follows: (1) Whether P’s offence is ‘an offence that has caused serious harm’ within section 117D(2)(c)(ii) is … Continue reading Wilson (NIAA Part 5A; Deportation Decisions): UTIAC 25 Nov 2020
(Grand Chamber) Air strikes were carried out by NATO forces against radio and television facilities in Belgrade on 23 April 1999. The claims of five of the applicants arose out of the deaths of relatives in this raid. The sixth claimed on his own account in respect of injuries sustained during the raid. The claimants … Continue reading Bankovic v Belgium: ECHR 12 Dec 2001
Unlawful Detention pending Deportation An offender had been recommended for deportation following conviction. He had served his sentence and would otherwise have been released on parole. He had no passport and no valid travel documents. He complained that the length of time for which he had then been detained was too long and that the … Continue reading Regina v Governor of Durham Prison, ex parte Hardial Singh: QBD 13 Dec 1983
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2. Held: The SSD’s appeal succeeded. ‘jurisdiction’ within the meaning of Article … Continue reading Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life. Held: The parts of DNA used for testing are not generally capable of revealing medical information about … Continue reading S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper: HL 22 Jul 2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
The appellant had applied for leave to remain as a postgraduate doctor. Before her application was determined, the rules changed. She said that her application should have been dealt with under the rules applicable at the time of her application. Held: The appeal failed. The decision was to be taken under the Rules applying at … Continue reading Odelola v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 20 May 2009
The appellant brought in policies which denied to asylum claimants who had failed to declare their status immediately upon entry, any shelter or support or the right to work. They were to be left to starve on the streets if they so wished. He appealed a finding that his behaviour amounted to the equivalent of … Continue reading The Secretary of State for the Home Department v Limbuela, Tesema, Adam: CA 21 May 2004
The claimants said they had been subjected to harassment and violence from non-state agents in their home country of Lithuania, and sought asylum. Held: It was for the person claiming the protection of the Convention provisions for ill-treatment to show that the country would not provide them with adequate protection against non-state agents. It was … Continue reading Bagdanavicius and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v: HL 26 May 2005
. .
Ms R had overstayed, but resisted deportation claiming a long term relationship with a man for who she cared. Her leave was continued 11 times. A Seventh Day Adventist, the care she provided was as a friend. Indefinite leave to remain was refused . .
The court was asked as to the respective duties of the Secretary of State and the First-tier Tribunal, on an appeal against refusal of an application to vary leave to enter or remain under the Immigration Act 1971, and more particularly as to the . .
The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that it had been an abuse of process and unlawful for the Secretary of State to have refused to grant to the Respondent refugee status and 5 years’ leave to remain in this country on the ground that he . .
The appellants had been refused refugee status on the ground that they were suspected of having been guilty of terrorist acts. They said that the definition of terrorism applied within the UK was wider than that in the Convention which contained the . .
The Court considered linked issues as to the treatment of ‘qualifying children’ and their parents, under the statutory regime contained in Part 5A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Three appellants (KO, IT and NS) argued that when . .
Extra Division, Inner House – The applicant sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal rejecting his appeals. The latter decision dismissed the applicant’s appeal against a decision of the respondent, the Home . .
UTIAC In considering the conjoined Article 8 ECHR claims of multiple family members decision-makers should first apply the Immigration Rules to each individual applicant and, if appropriate, then consider Article . .
. .
Leave to remain – Application – Reasonableness of expecting child applicant to leave United Kingdom – Proper approach to applying reasonableness test . .
. .
The court considered the meaning of the term ‘unduly harsh’ in paragraph 399 of the Immigration Rules and section 117C(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. . .
1. A court or tribunal retains jurisdiction to deal with ‘open justice’ aspects arising from a case, after that case has concluded before it.
2. A higher court or tribunal may impose an anonymity order that has effect in respect of the . .
Application for judicial review against a decision of the Secretary of State to the effect that the claimant’s claim to be protected against deportation to Sri Lanka on grounds of his Convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 was to be . .
1) Under the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003, as amended, a Female Genital Mutilation Prevention Order (‘FGMPO’) may be issued by a Family Court to protect against a domestic or extraterritorial threat of FGM.
2) Where a person (‘P’) . .
Section 120 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
(1) Where, in the course of a human rights appeal under section 82(2)(b) of the 2002 Act, P responds to a notice served by the Secretary of State under section 120 of that Act by . .
(1) Where a human rights claim is made, in circumstances where the Secretary of State considers the nature of what is being alleged is such that the claim could also constitute a protection claim, it is appropriate for her to draw this to the . .
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, s. 94B: Access to lawyers
(1) In the light of Kiarie and Byndloss [2017] UKSC 42, the first question to be answered by the First-tier Tribunal in an appeal involving a claim that has been certified . .
AIT Section 88(2)(d) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 restricts the grounds of appeal to those mentioned in s 88(4) if and only if the reason cited has some relationship to the application. . .
The petitioner sought reduction of an order for his removal. . .
The court asked whether the evidence showed that the threshold of severity had been reached to turn the treatment of the applicant into an infringement of his human right not to suffer inhuman or degrading treatment. Having entered the UK with a . .
Where a provision of the Rules (such as that in para 245DD(k)) provides that points will not be awarded if the decision-maker is not satisfied as to another (non-points-scoring) aspect of the Rule, the non-points-scoring aspect and the requirement . .
Judicial review raises a short question of construction of section 113(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, ‘was the claimant’s claim, made in the course of an immigration appeal against the defendant’s refusal to grant her leave . .
The court considered a challenge to the rules governing ‘out of country’ appeals against immigration decisions. They had in each case convictions leading to prison terms for serious drugs related offences.
Held: The appeals were allowed, and . .
AIT The presumptions in s.72 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 that in the circumstances specified a person has been convicted by a final judgment of a ‘particularly serious crime’ for the . .
The Commission considered whether the deprivation of citizenship decision breached the Secretary of State’s practice or policy.
Held: Sections 78 and 92 of the Immigration Nationality and Asylum Act 2002 (preventing removal while an appeal is . .
This case raises issues regarding the application of sections 117A, B and C of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (‘the 2002 Act’) in relation to serious foreign criminals. . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Our law-index is a substantial selection from our database. Cases here are restricted in number by date and lack the additional facilities formerly available within lawindexpro. Please do enjoy this free version of the lawindex. Case law does not ‘belong’ to lawyers. Judgments are made up of words which can be read and understood (if … Continue reading law index