Regina v Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte Mehmet Colak: CA 6 Jul 1993

The Home Office was entitled to return refugees to the country in which they had first stopped if it was a Community State.

Citations:

Times 06-Jul-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Dept Ex Mehmet Colak CA 19-Jan-1994
Return to intermediate country by refugee not challengeable under art 8a. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Dept Ex Mehmet Colak CA 19-Jan-1994
Return to intermediate country by refugee not challengeable under art 8a. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration, European

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87989

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Marchon: CA 23 Feb 1993

It was permissible for the Home Secretary to order the deportation of a convicted drug trafficker for the public good, even though he was an EC national, and though there was nothing to suggest any propensity to commit any further offences. It was not necessary to show that the offence was so notorious as to require special treatment. The offence here was sufficiently serious to justify such an action.

Citations:

Times 23-Feb-1993, [1993] Imm AR 384

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedB v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 18-May-2000
The claimant had come to England as a child from Italy. As an adult, he was convicted of a sexual assault against his daughter, and after release from his prison sentence of five years, he now appealed against a deportation order, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Immigration, European

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87877

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Dept Ex Mehmet Colak: CA 19 Jan 1994

Return to intermediate country by refugee not challengeable under art 8a.

Citations:

Gazette 19-Jan-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRegina v Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte Mehmet Colak CA 6-Jul-1993
The Home Office was entitled to return refugees to the country in which they had first stopped if it was a Community State. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoRegina v Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte Mehmet Colak CA 6-Jul-1993
The Home Office was entitled to return refugees to the country in which they had first stopped if it was a Community State. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87946

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Abdi and Another: CA 21 Apr 1994

The Home Secretary has no duty to show the factual evidence he had relied upon as to the safety of a deportee’s destination country.
The Home Secretary need not state all information on which his certificate was based. The court recognised the need for speed decisions.

Judges:

Steyn LJ

Citations:

Independent 21-Apr-1994, Times 25-Apr-1994

Statutes:

Geneva Convention 1951

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Abdi, Same v Same, ex parte Gawe QBD 24-Feb-1994
The Secretary of State must state all the facts on which his opinion had based when ordering the deportation of an Asylum-seeker as to the safety of the destination country. ‘In a situation in which it is to be expected that most or all of the . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Musisi HL 1987
Mr Musisi sought entry to the United Kingdom as a visitor from Kenya. When that application looked as though it might fail, he claimed political asylum as a refugee from Uganda. His application for asylum was refused on the basis that he had come . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Abdi, Same v Same, Ex Parte Gawe HL 15-Feb-1996
Two Somali nationals were refused asylum and sought to challenge a decision rejecting their claim that to be sent to Spain would be contrary to the United Kingdom’s obligations under the Geneva Convention of 1951.
Held: Adjudicators are . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87823

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.’

Judges:

Staughton LJ, Neill LJ

Citations:

Gazette 17-Dec-1993, Independent 10-Nov-1993, Times 27-Oct-1993, [1995] 1 All ER 658

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 3(5)(b)

Jurisdiction:

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
Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation
(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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Administrative

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87840

Regina v Ofori, Regina v Tackie: CA 17 Nov 1993

Court has power to grant bail or to release a person, pending their appeal despite the existence of a deportation order.

Citations:

Times 17-Nov-1993, Gazette 08-Dec-1993, (1994) 99 Cr App R 223

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Okolie CACD 16-Jun-2000
Evidence is always required on matters relating to foreign law, and such evidence given in person unless it was agreed or no issue was taken. Untranslated reports of stolen vehicles prepared by employees of the person who claimed to have been the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Immigration

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87485

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Balbo B and C Auto Transporti Internazionali: Admn 22 Mar 2001

Where a notice of liability was served on a transport operator with regard to his responsibility for transporting illegal immigrants into the country, and he wished to challenge it, the proper approach was to allow the notice to expire, and then to defend any proceedings brought. Given that way of dealing with it, it was not appropriate to challenge the notice itself by way of judicial review. The form of notice issued after review did not refer to the Secretary of State’s need to pursue his remedy through the courts. This was unfortunate, but if it were true, it would make him judge and jury in his own cause.

Citations:

Gazette 11-May-2001, Times 22-Mar-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 195, [2001] 1 WLR 1556

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Immigration, Transport

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88650

Regina v Eyck; R v Hadakoglu: CACD 8 Feb 2000

The offence of being knowingly concerned in making arrangements for illegal entry of aliens into the United Kingdom was committed if the constituents of the offence were shown. That did not necessitate the actual bringing of someone into the UK. Here the defendant had driven a van onto a ferry bound for Dover when illegal immigrants were discovered inside. The offence was complete.

Citations:

Times 08-Feb-2000

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 25 (1) (a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Immigration

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85251

R v Eyck; R v Hadakoglu: CACD 3 Feb 2000

The offence of being knowingly concerned in making arrangements for illegal entry of aliens into the United Kingdom was committed if the constituents of the offence were shown. That did not necessitate the actual bringing of someone into the UK. Here the defendant had driven a van onto a ferry bound for Dover when illegal immigrants were discovered inside. The offence was complete.

Citations:

Gazette 03-Feb-2000

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 25 (1) (a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Immigration

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85252

Jollah, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (No 2): Admn 9 Nov 2017

Claim for damages for false imprisonment arising out of the imposition of what has been referred to as a curfew, namely a requirement that the claimant be present for a certain number of hours each day at specified premises after release from immigration detention centre.

Judges:

Lewis J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2821 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoJollah, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 24-Feb-2017
Judicial review of refusal to lift curfew conditions . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromJollah, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 12-Jun-2018
. .
At Admin (2)Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department SC 12-Feb-2020
Claim for damages for false imprisonment brought in judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of a curfew imposed upon the claimant, purportedly under paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971.
Held: The Court of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Immigration

Updated: 15 October 2022; Ref: scu.599409

Jollah, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 24 Feb 2017

Judicial review of refusal to lift curfew conditions

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 330 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoJollah, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (No 2) Admn 9-Nov-2017
Claim for damages for false imprisonment arising out of the imposition of what has been referred to as a curfew, namely a requirement that the claimant be present for a certain number of hours each day at specified premises after release from . .
Admin (1)Jollah, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 12-Jun-2018
. .
At Admin (1)Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department SC 12-Feb-2020
Claim for damages for false imprisonment brought in judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of a curfew imposed upon the claimant, purportedly under paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971.
Held: The Court of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 15 October 2022; Ref: scu.577300

Kigen and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 11 Dec 2015

Judges:

Lord Justice Moore-Bick

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 1286, [2016] 1 WLR 723, [2015] WLR(D) 522

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedDepartment for Work and Pensions v The Information Commissioner and Another CA 27-Jul-2016
The applicant sought disclosure of certain organisations who had provided placements for those seeking work. They said that in the past disclosure had led to adverse publicity for those organisations, and refused disclosure under the department’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 13 October 2022; Ref: scu.557085

MBR v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: SCS 17 May 2013

Application: ‘to hold [the procedural judge’s] interlocutor of 12 February 2013 pro non scripto and, in any event, for determination of the application for leave by a quorum of three judges of the Inner House’.

Judges:

Lord Carloway. Lord Justice Clerk

Citations:

[2013] ScotCS CSIH – 66

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Immigration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 October 2022; Ref: scu.512060

Regina v Belaifa (Idis Ali): CACD 3 Apr 1996

A Judge must state the reasons for recommending deportation or the order will be invalid. The defendant had been convicted of criminal damage being reckless as to whether wlife was endangered. In the absence of such reasons the defendant would be put in a position of being unable effectively to exercise his right of appeal.

Judges:

Gage J

Citations:

Gazette 03-Apr-1996, (1996) 8 Admin LR 525

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 6(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86113

Vilvarajah and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 26 Oct 1987

Judges:

Sir John Donaldson MR, Neill, Ralph Gibson LJJ

Citations:

[1987] EWCA Civ 11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromVilvarajah and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Oct-1991
Five Tamils were refused asylum in the UK and returned to Sri Lanka but then continued to suffer ill-treatment. Their complaints to Strasbourg were rejected under both Articles 3 and 13, but with regard to Article 3, it held: ‘108. The court’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.471052

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Zamir: CA 21 Dec 1979

The claimant appealed refusal of his request for a writ of habeas corpus. He had been detained for return to Pakistand. He had obtained an entry certificate, but then married, but did not disclose that on entry.
Held: The failure amounted to a deception and the detention and intended removal were correct.

Judges:

Stephenson, Eveleigh and Brandon, LJJ

Citations:

[1980] QB 378, [1980] 1 All ER 1041

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Zamir QBD 14-Mar-1979
The applicant sought a writ of habeas corpus having been detained pending his removal after failing to disclose his subsquent marriage on entry under an entry certificate.
Held: The request failed on the basis that entry had been obtained by a . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Zamir HL 17-Jul-1980
A person who obtained leave to enter, but did so by fraud, was an illegal entrant, on the basis that the fraud had the effect of vitiating the leave to enter which had been granted: ‘it is clear on general principles of law that deception may arise . .
At court of AppealZamir v United Kingdom ECHR 1983
(Commission) Review of the lawfulness of a detention must be by a court, by a body which is judicial in character, and the review must be speedy. The right under Article 5.4 ‘must be seen as independent of the possibility of applying to a court for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.271024

Bizimana, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 2 Apr 2012

Appeal by a foreign national, who contends that his detention pending possible deportation was, or at least became, unlawful.

Judges:

Pill, Jackson, Sullivan LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 414

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 3(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Immigration

Updated: 06 October 2022; Ref: scu.452409

Pham v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 20 Sep 2018

Deprivation of citizenship – alleged involvement in terrorist training

Judges:

Arden, Singh, Coulson LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 2064, [2018] WLR(D) 594, [2019] 1 WLR 2070, [2019] Imm AR 296, [2019] 4 All ER 199, [2019] INLR 327

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.622625

Secretary of State for The Home Department v SK (Sri Lanka): CA 19 Jan 2012

The secretary appealed against a decision quashing her refusal of a grant of citizenship to the respondent on the grounuds that she was not satisfied as to the respondent’s good character. He had been an active member of the Tamil Tigers who had been found responsible for the murder of prisoners or war and had been proscribed as a terrorist group.

Judges:

Richards, Hallett, Stanley Burnton LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 16

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

British Nationality Act 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450424

Chapti and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others: Admn 16 Dec 2011

Challenge to the amendments to paragraph 281 of the Immigration Rules requiring the foreign spouses and partners of British citizens or persons settled in the UK applying for what I shall refer to as ‘spouse visas’, that is for leave to enter the UK with a view to settlement, to produce a test certificate of knowledge of the English language to a prescribed standard.
Held: t Beatson J concluded that the fact that it might be possible to argue that the operation of the Rule was a disproportionate infringement of an individual’s article 8 rights did not render the Rule itself disproportionate.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3370 (Admin), [2012] 2 All ER 653

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal FromBibi and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 12-Apr-2013
The applicant appealed against refusal of her challenge to the regulations requiring certain standards of spoken English in foreign spouses seeking to come here to be with their settled or British Citizen spouse.
Held: The imposition of the . .
At first instanceAli and Bibi, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Nov-2015
At the claimants alleged that the rules requiring a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or a person settled in this country to pass a test of competence in the English language before coming to live here were an unjustifiable interference . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights, Discrimination

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.450067

Al-Mehdawi v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 23 Nov 1989

The applicant, a student had overstayed his leave. Through his solicitor’s negligence, he lost his appeal against deportation. He sought judicial review of that decision.
Held: Judgment obtained in a party’s absence due entirely to the fault of that party or his advisor was not one obtained in breach of the rules of natural justice for the purpose of judicial review. The loss of his right to be heard was not a procedural impropriety or denial of natural justice. Nor was he entitled to certiorari. In the public law context of removal from the jurisdiction of an alien, a litigant must answer for the failings of his legal advisers.
Lord Bridge said that any other decision would come ‘at the cost of opening such a wide door which would indeed seriously undermine the principle of finality in decision-making.’
The respondent was an Iraqi student who overstayed his leave to remain in the United Kingdom. When he was served with a notice of the Secretary of State’s decision to deport him he instructed solicitors to lodge an appeal. When a hearing date for the appeal was fixed the solicitors wrote to notify him of the date but negligently sent the letter to his previous address and the respondent never received it. The adjudicator subsequently dismissed the appeal on the basis of the documents before him since neither the respondent nor his solicitors had appeared. When the solicitors received notice of the dismissal they again misaddressed the communication intended to inform the respondent of the result, so that by the time he knew of the dismissal of his appeal it was too late for him to appeal further against the adjudicator’s decision. The respondent applied for, and was granted, certiorari to quash the adjudicator’s decision, the judge holding that he was bound by a previous decision of the Court of Appeal which decided that certiorari ought to be granted where the negligence of the applicant’s solicitors had deprived him of an oral hearing. The judge’s decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal. The Secretary of State appealed to the House of Lords.
Held — A party to a dispute who had been afforded an opportunity of presenting his case to the person deciding the dispute but who had lost the opportunity to have his case heard through the fault of the legal advisers to whom he had entrusted the conduct of the dispute on his behalf could not complain that he had been the victim of a procedural impropriety or that natural justice had been denied to him, and it made no difference whether the matter in dispute raised private law or public law issues. Accordingly, the respondent was not entitled to judicial review of the adjudicator’s decision and the Secretary of State’s appeal would therefore be allowed.

Judges:

Lord Bridge, Lord Roskill, Lord Brandon, Lord Oliver, Lord Goff

Citations:

[1989] 3 WLR 1294, [1989] 3 All ER 843, [1990] 1 AC 876, [1989] UKHL 7

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigtaion Act 1971 21

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v West Sussex Quarter Sessions, ex parte Albert and Maud Johnson Trust CA 1973
. .
OverruledRahmani and Others v Diggines HL 20-Mar-1986
The Court of Appeal had overturned the rejection of an administrative appeal from a deportation decision, on the ground that there had been a denial of natural justice when the person involved in an administrative appeal did not attend the hearing . .
OverruledRegina v Diggines, ex parte Rahmani CA 1985
R, had failed to attend the hearing of her appeal from a refusal to extend her stay in the UK. Her advisers had failed to note her new address and had been unable to notify her of the hearing. The appeal was dismissed in her absence. The adjudicator . .

Cited by:

CitedMaqsood v The Special Adjudicator, The Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 3-Dec-2001
The applicant sought judicial review of the decision to proceed with his appeal in his absence. He, his advisers and his witness had gone to the wrong court. The court had changed the venue from previous hearings, but the notice of hearing had not . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Ayres Admn 20-Oct-2004
The prosecutor appealed a decision of the magistrates to dismiss the case for abuse of process, having failed to comply with several and repeated directions as to the management of the case. He said that he had not been given opportunity to make . .
CitedRegina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal ex parte Haile CA 2002
The adjudicator in the asylum application had made a crucial mistake about the identity of the political party in Ethiopia, with which the claimant was connected. The error was not drawn to the attention of the IAT. The evidence necessary to prove . .
CitedFP (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 23-Jan-2007
The claimants said that rules which allowed an appeal tribunal to proceed in their absence when they were absent through no fault of their own, were unlawful in depriving them of a fair trial. The claimants had each moved house but their former . .
CitedLukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland SC 23-May-2012
Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal . .
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
AppliedFormosa Plastics Corporation USA v Chauhan and others CA 6-Apr-1998
The defendant sought a second adjournment of his application for leave to appeal against summary judgment for $21m with interest in respect of a judgment obtained in Texas. The defendant was said to have given his personal guarantee for the purchase . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Immigration, Natural Justice

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.180545

Regina v Naillie and Another: HL 14 Jul 1993

An entry into the UK at an airport, for immigration law purposes, was not on disembarkation, nor on going toward immigration control, but only took place when the immigration officer was approached.

Citations:

Independent 01-Jun-1993, Gazette 14-Jul-1993, Times 27-May-1993

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.87408

Abdulaziz, Cabales And Balkandali v United Kingdom: ECHR 28 May 1985

The claimants had each settled within the UK in accordance with Immigration rules, but now challenged refusal of leave to remain to their husbands who sought to join them.
Held: Article 8 did not impose a ‘general obligation on the part of a Contracting State to respect the choice by married couples of the country of their matrimonial residence and to accept the non-national spouses for settlement in that country’.
‘Whatever else the word ‘family’ may mean, it must at any rate include the relationship that arises from a lawful and genuine marriage . . even if a family life . . has not yet been fully established’.

Citations:

9473/81, [1985] ECHR 7, 9214/80, 9474/81, (1985) 7 EHRR 471

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedAli and Bibi, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Nov-2015
At the claimants alleged that the rules requiring a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or a person settled in this country to pass a test of competence in the English language before coming to live here were an unjustifiable interference . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration, Family

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445027

NA (Excluded Decision; Identifying Judge) Afghanistan: UTIAC 20 Oct 2010

UTIAC 1. There is no right of appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a decision not to extend time under rule 10 of the First-tier Tribunal Procedure Rules when a notice of appeal has been given out of time. It is a ‘preliminary decision made in relation to an appeal’ within Art 3(m) of the Appeals (Excluded Decisions) Order 2009 (as amended) and consequently is an ‘excluded decision’ for the purposes of s.11 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
2. The parties are entitled to know the judge who makes a decision in an appeal. In the case of an appeal determined without a hearing that means that the determination or decision must identify the judge. The absence of the Duty Judge’s name identifying the decision-maker of the decision not to extend time resulted in a fundamental breach of justice which vitiated the decision.

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 444 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.444062

GS (Public Funds – Tax Credits) India: UTIAC 12 Oct 2010

UTIAC Paragraph 6C of the Immigration Rules specifies that an applicant for entry clearance whose arrival would cause an increase in the tax credits which his sponsor is already receiving will (in contrast to in-country applicants under paragraph 6B) be regarded as having recourse to public funds. But where the applicant will be joining a spouse or partner who is both working and bringing up children, the amount of working tax credit payable will actually be reduced. That is because the sponsor will lose the lone parent supplement which forms part of the working tax credit.

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 419 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.444061

PS (Paragraph 320(11) Discretion: Care Needed) India: UTIAC 28 Sep 2010

UTIAC In exercising discretion under paragraph 320(11) of HC 395, as amended, to refuse an application for entry clearance in a case where the automatic prohibition on the grant of entry clearance in paragraph 320(7B) is disapplied by paragraph 320(7C), the decision maker must exercise great care in assessing the aggravating circumstances said to justify refusal and must have regard to the public interest in encouraging those unlawfully in the United Kingdom to leave and seek to regularise their status by an application for entry clearance.

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 440 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.444059

KS and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Croydon: Admn 20 Oct 2010

The claimants sought judicial review in respect of the alleged failure of the London Borough of Croydon Council, as local education authority, to make suitable provision for their education, and more generally in respect of the alleged failings of the Council to provide sufficient secondary schooling in its area. The claimants are children, each of them 14 years of age, each an unaccompanied asylum seeker, each currently looked after by the Council under the relevant provisions of the Children Act 1989.

Judges:

Lindblom J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3391 (Admin), [2011] ELR 109

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Education

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442709

Pasha, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 4 Aug 2011

Renewed application for leave to appeal – refused.

Judges:

Hooper LJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 955

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromPasha, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 15-Feb-2011
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442543

Huang, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 28 Jul 2011

The claimant a native Burmese, had come here to study, and now sought asylum rather than be returned to Burma where her pro-democracy views would put her in danger.

Judges:

Graham Wood QC J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2069 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442440

English Speaking Board (International) Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 12 Jul 2011

The claimant challenged the lawfulness of alterations to the Immigration Rules and the 2003 Regulations.

Judges:

Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1788 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 3(2), British Nationality (General) Regulations 2003, British Nationality Act 1981 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Education

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441592

Abdulkadir and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 28 Jun 2016

Judges:

Irwin J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1504 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.566262

HK (Iraq) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 23 Nov 2017

The claimants had applied for asylum, but had arrived from other EU countries. Their claims being dismissed, they were detained pending removal. They said that on return to Bulgaria, they would face harsh treatment.

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1871

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromSS, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another Admn 26-May-2017
The claimant sought asylum, claiming to be a child.
Held: He was not a child when detained. However, he had been detained to secure his transfer to the responsible member state under the Dublin III scheme; that it had to be established that he . .

Cited by:

CitedHemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, European, Human Rights

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.599608

SS, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: Admn 26 May 2017

The claimant sought asylum, claiming to be a child.
Held: He was not a child when detained. However, he had been detained to secure his transfer to the responsible member state under the Dublin III scheme; that it had to be established that he posed a significant risk of absconding; and that his detention was unlawful because, even if he posed a significant risk of absconding, his detention was in conflict with articles 28(2) and 2(n).

Judges:

John Howell QC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1295 (Admin), [2017] 1 WLR 3641, [2017] WLR(D) 380

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At AdmnHemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 4-Oct-2018
Conjoined hearing of appeals in respect of three judgments covering the cases of five individual immigrants who were placed in detention for periods pending possible removal to other EU Member States pursuant to the asylum claim arrangements under . .
At AdmnHemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Appeal fromHK (Iraq) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 23-Nov-2017
The claimants had applied for asylum, but had arrived from other EU countries. Their claims being dismissed, they were detained pending removal. They said that on return to Bulgaria, they would face harsh treatment. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.588863

RU (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 8 Jun 2011

The applicant who had had indefinite leave to remain had been convicted of a very serious offence of violence. After serving his 15 year sentence the respondent said that he was liable to deportation.

Judges:

Longmore, Aikens, Elias LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 651

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440445

Khaled, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (No 2): Admn 15 Jun 2016

The claimant failed asylum seekers sought damages alleging that their detention pending removal had been unlawful.

Judges:

Garnham J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1394 (Admin), [2016] WLR(D) 328, [2016] 3 CMLR 31, [2016] 1 WLR 4243

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoKhaled v SS Home Department Admn 18-Apr-2016
The Court was asked as to the making of orders for the return of asylum seekers to Bulgaria, being their first country of arrival within the EU. The claimants challenged both the lawfulness of their removal and the lawfulness of their detention.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.565719

SM and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 8 May 2013

The court was asked as to the impact of section 55 of the 2009 Act on the consideration by the Secretary of State for the Home Department of applications by children, made outside the scope of the Immigration Rules, for leave to remain in the United Kingdom.

Judges:

Holman J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1144 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 169

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 55

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Children

Updated: 10 September 2022; Ref: scu.503471

San Michael College Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 18 Mar 2011

The college appealed against revocation of its licence to act as an education college catering for overseas students.

Judges:

Behrens J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 642 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Education, Immigration

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.430841

S and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v First-Tier Tribunal (IAC): Admn 1 Feb 2011

The court was asked as to the entitlement of the claimants to appeal against the rejection of their asylum claims under section 83.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 627 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 83

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.430743

KM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 17 Mar 2011

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 275

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromLumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
CitedRT (Zimbabwe) and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Jul-2012
The claimants said it would be wrong to return them to Zimbabwe where they would be able to evade persecution only by pretending to a loyalty to, and enthusiasm for the current regime.
Held: The Secretary of State’s appeals failed. The HJ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430643

Secretary of State for The Home Department v Abdi: CA 9 Mar 2011

The court was asked: ‘in deciding whether a foreign national facing deportation has been detained for too long, does time which he has spent appealing against deportation count? If it does, then sufficiently protracted legal proceedings will sooner or later secure his release however weak his case and however strong the reasons for detaining him. If it does not, then a detainee with a sound legal challenge to removal or deportation may be penalised for asserting his rights by years of incarceration. So the question inexorably raises another question: is there a middle way?’

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 242

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Torts – Other

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430470

Samba Diouf v Minister of Labour, Employment and Immigration: ECJ 1 Mar 2011

ECJ (Area of Freedom, Security and Justice) Request by a citizen of a country seeking refugee status – Rejection of this request, as part of a national process accelerated in the absence of reasons justifying the granting of international protection – No appeal against the decision to submit the request for an expedited procedure – Right to effective judicial review.

Citations:

C-69/10, [2011] EUECJ C-69/10

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

OpinionSamba Diouf v Minister of Labour, Employment and Immigration ECJ 28-Jul-2011
ECJ Directive 2005/85/EC – Minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status – ‘Decision taken on [the] application for asylum’ within the meaning of Article 39 of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Immigration

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430223

AE (Libya), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 2 Feb 2011

The appellant challenged as unlawful his administrative detention nafter finishing his prison sentence and pending removal to Libya.

Judges:

Stephen Davis J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 154 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Immigration

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428421

Regina 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 were awaiting appeal.
Held: Leaving asylum applicants without benefits defeated the purpose of the asylum laws. The Regulations were quashed. Parliament cannot have intended a significant number of genuine asylum seekers to be impaled on the horns of so intolerable a dilemma: the need either to abandon their claims to refugee status, or alternatively to maintain them as best they can but in a state of utter destitution. Non-asylum-seeking immigrants had since 1980 invariably been admitted subject to the condition of ‘no recourse to public funds’ and, more importantly, unlike asylum seekers, can in any event return to their country of origin.

Judges:

Neill LJ, Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

Gazette 12-Sep-1996, Times 27-Jun-1996, [1997] 1 WLR 275, [1996] 4 All ER 385, [1996] EWCA Civ 1293

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 21, Social Security (Persons from Abroad) Regulations 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina (on the Application of Husain) v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 5-Oct-2001
New regulations created a system under which applicants for asylum could be deprived of all benefits on the decision of an asylum support adjudicator. That person was appointed by the Home Secretary, and it was alleged was not impartial. It was . .
CitedRegina 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 . .
CitedSalem 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 . .
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 . .
CitedRegina v Westminster City Council ex parte A, London Borough of Lambeth ex parte X and similar CA 17-Feb-1997
This was an appeal from orders of certiorari quashing the decisions of three local authorities refusing to provide accommodation for the respondents, four asylum seekers, whose applications for asylum were presently being considered by the Secretary . .
CitedK v London Borough of Lambeth CA 31-Jul-2003
The claimant appealed against refusal of judicial review. She had entered the UK, and applied for asylum. She was then found to have contracted a marriage of convenience, and thus become ineligible for support. She appealed and now sought housing . .
CitedKola and Another v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 28-Nov-2007
The claimant said that the 1987 Regulations were invalid, in making invalid any claim for benefits by an asylum seeker who had not made his application exactly upon entry to the UK.
Held: The appeals were allowed. Section 11 of the 1971 Act is . .
CitedM, Regina (on the Application of) v Slough Borough Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local social services authority is obliged, under section 21(1)(a) of the 1948 Act, to arrange (and pay for) residential accommodation for a person subject to immigration control who is HIV positive but whose only . .
CitedUnison, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor SC 26-Jul-2017
The union appellant challenged the validity of the imposition of fees on those seeking to lay complaints in the Employment Tribunal system.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The fees were discriminatory and restricted access to justice.
The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.87771

Suppiah and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 11 Jan 2011

Wyn Williams J said: ‘a policy which is in principle capable of being implemented lawfully but which nonetheless gives rise to an unacceptable risk of unlawful decision-making is itself an unlawful policy.’

Judges:

Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedE and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Administrative

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427932

Wray, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 16 Dec 2010

Application for judicial review against the decision of the Defendant to refuse to treat a series of submissions by the Claimant that he should not be removed from the UK because such removal would infringe his Article 8 ECHR rights as a fresh claim under paragraph 353 Immigration Rules HC395.

Judges:

Bidder QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3301 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427285

Secretary of State for The Home Department v DD (Afghanistan): CA 10 Dec 2010

The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for asylum and protection on human rights grounds. He said that if returned to Afghanistan he would face a real risk of serious harm.

Judges:

Pill, Rimer, Black LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1407

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 54, European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromAl-Sirri v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 21-Nov-2012
The appellants had been refused refugee status on the ground that they were suspected of having been guilty of terrorist acts. They said that the definition of terrorism applied within the UK was wider than that in the Convention which contained the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427003