The asylum applicants had complained that the appellant’s discretionary leave policy for the grant of temporary admissions was unlawful. As failed asylum seekers, they had been held on temporary admission rather than being granted discretionary leave to remain. They had been involved in the hijacking of an airliner in order to escape Afghanistan. The defendant appealed a finding that the policy was a misuse of his power.
Held: The appeal failed. The appellant having had his initial decision to refuse discretionary leave to remain for six months, had sought to detain the claimants on the basis that they might be required to submit to immigration officers for examination. However no notice had been given to the claimants of such a request and, ‘It would be very far-fetched . . . to regard everyone [entitled] to discretionary leave as being ipso facto a person who might be required to submit to further examination, even when no change of circumstances was in question.’
Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Brooke LJ VP, Neuberger LJ
Times 09-Oct-2006,  EWCA Civ 1157,  INLR 575
Immigration Act 1971 3A(1), Immigration (Leave to Enter) Order 2001
England and Wales
Cited – Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another HL 8-Mar-2006
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about . .
Cited – BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another HL 30-Apr-2008
The House considered whether the Secretary of State for Health acted lawfully in issuing guidance as to the employment of foreign doctors to employing bodies within the National Health Service in April 2006.
Held: The secretary of state’s . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 May 2021; Ref: scu.244169