Raza, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Bail – Conditions – Variation – Article 9 ECHR) (IJR): UTIAC 1 Feb 2016

UTIAC (i) Presidential Guidance Note No 1 of 2012 ‘Bail Guidance for Judges Presiding over Immigration and Asylum Hearings’ is an instrument of guidance and not instruction. The guidance should, however, normally, be followed and good reason is required for not doing so.
(ii) The First-tier Tribunal (‘FtT’) is empowered to adjudicate on applications to vary the terms of its bail orders.
(iii) The FtT retains exclusive power to vary any of its bail orders during their lifespan. The Chief Immigration Officer has no power to interfere with such orders or make any other order in such circumstances.
(iv) In cases where there is no appeal pending, an application for bail can be made to either the FtT or the Chief Immigration Officer.
(v) While every case will be fact sensitive, a curfew and electronic monitoring restriction in a bail order will not normally constitute a disproportionate interference so as to infringe Article 9 ECHR, Article 10 of the Fundamental rights Charter or the Equality Act 2010.

McCloskey J P, Storey UTJ
[2016] UKUT 132 (IAC)
Bailii
European Convenion on Human Rights
England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.564159