Salem v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 6 Mar 1998

The Secretary of State having decided against an application for asylum could direct non-payment of benefits although he would hear representations.
Held: Regulation 70(3A)(b)(i) defines a date by reference to the recording by the Secretary of State of the claim for asylum as having been determined. There is no reference to notification. The reference to ‘recorded’ is a formal criterion to be applied by looking at the records kept by the Secretary of State. It is used in contrast and contradistinction to any concept of notification.

Judges:

Lord Justice Hobhouse, Lord Justice Brooke, Sir John Balcombe

Citations:

Times 18-Mar-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 409, [1999] QB 805

Statutes:

Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 70(3)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte B and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants CA 27-Jun-1996
The Secretary of State had introduced regulations which excluded the statutory right to payment of ‘urgent case’ benefits for asylum seekers who had not claimed asylum immediately upon arrival, or whose claims for asylum had been rejected, and who . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Bawa Admn 27-Oct-1997
The court considered the effect of a decision letter issued by the Secretary of State but which was not sent to the applicant. Nevertheless it had the effect of stopping his benefits.
Held: The letter was clear and unambiguous; it is in no way . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Karaoui Admn 11-Mar-1997
The court considered the withdrawal of benefits for asylum seekers once their application had been determined. The court could see no significant difference between withdrawing benefits once the decision is made, even if the decision and/or the . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Salem HL 3-Mar-1999
The House of Lords has the power to hear a case where the parties have in effect settled and there remains no lis at issue, but the House will not hear such an academic case where no general issue of importance is at stake, or the facts are . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Onibiyo CA 28-Mar-1996
More than one asylum claim may be made, but they must be sufficiently different to justify a second claim. The court considered when an application could be treated as having been finally determined and when it was necessary for the Secretary of . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Thirakumar and others CA 1989
After asylum application files had been considered by the Asylum Directorate the papers were returned to the immigration authorities at the relevant port of entry for the holding of a further interview with each of the applicants and the handing to . .
See AlsoRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Salem CA 19-Dec-1997
This was an appeal against refusal of leave to apply for a judicial review. The issue raised was parallel to issues raised in the Rafiq case which had been heard but on which judgment was presently reserved. The case revealed a real issue of law, . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anufrijeva HL 26-Jun-2003
The appellant challenged the withdrawal of her benefits payments. She had applied for asylum, and been granted reduced rate income support. A decision was made refusing her claim, but that decision was, by policy, not communicated to her for several . .
On appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Salem HL 3-Mar-1999
The House of Lords has the power to hear a case where the parties have in effect settled and there remains no lis at issue, but the House will not hear such an academic case where no general issue of importance is at stake, or the facts are . .
Appealed toRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte F S Salem Admn 11-Dec-1997
The applicant sought judicial review of a decision refusing him asylum. The decision had been made and his benefits stopped, but he was not given any detail of the notice for several months.
Held: The decision did appear to have been made and . .
See AlsoRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Salem CA 19-Dec-1997
This was an appeal against refusal of leave to apply for a judicial review. The issue raised was parallel to issues raised in the Rafiq case which had been heard but on which judgment was presently reserved. The case revealed a real issue of law, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143887