Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Chahal: CA 27 Oct 1993

Chahal was a Sikh separatist leader who was refused asylum and whom the Secretary of State proposed to deport to India as a threat to national security here.
Held: The Home Secretary must balance the need to deport against against any threat to the deportee’s safety, but his decision was only to be challenged if it was irrational or perverse or unlawful. The court was entitled to look at the assessment made of the risks to the applicant should he be deported in order to determine whether the rejection of the asylum claim was Wednesbury unreasonable. Neill LJ concluded that ‘That the court has power to examine the grounds on which a deportation order is made even where the interests of national security are relied upon, though in practice the the court’s power of scrutiny may be limited.’
Staughton LJ, Neill LJ
Gazette 17-Dec-1993, Independent 10-Nov-1993, Times 27-Oct-1993, [1995] 1 All ER 658
Immigration Act 1971 3(5)(b)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ex parte Chahal QBD 5-Apr-1993
The Home Secretary need not consider any risk of torture as an issue separate from that of persecution, when considering making an order for deportation. . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromChahal v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-1996
(Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Manelfi Admn 25-Oct-1996
The applicant sought judicial review of the defendant’s refusal to employ him to work at GCHQ, which had a policy not to employ anyone with non-British parents save exceptionally. The claimant said this was racially discriminatory.
Held: The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.87840