The applicant a native of Cameroon, had sought asylum. He was refused. His appeal to an adjudicator was dismissed, and directions for his removal were given. Some months later his solicitors submitted what they said was new evidence. They asked for the removal directions to be cancelled. The Secretary of State refused, and issued a certificate under the section. That was challenged in proceedings for judicial review.
Held: ‘In order for there to be a legitimate purpose there has to be some new material of substance placed before the Secretary of State which goes beyond what has been presented to the Special Adjudicator and it is for the Secretary of State to consider whether it does or does not have any weight. If he considers that it does not, the conclusion follows that he is entitled to certify the claim as one for the purposes of delay with no other legitimate purpose.’
References: [2002] EWHC Admin 1550
Judges: Ousely J
Statutes: Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 73(8)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Balamurali, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 9-May-2003 (, [2003] EWHC 1183 (Admin))
. . - Cited – Balamurali, Sandhu v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 15-Dec-2003 (, [2003] EWCA Civ 1806, Times 09-Jan-04, [2004] INLR 107)
The applicants challenged certificates from the respondent that their appeals were mere delaying tactice.
Held: The section aimed to grant specific rights of appeal, to ensure that all possible appeal issues were decided, and to prevent abuse. . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 24 September 2020; Ref: scu.190490
