PracticeDuran Seddon practices in areas of immigration, asylum and nationality and human rights. He is the author of the highest selling text on UK immigration law and practice (the JCWI Handbook in Immigration, Nationality and Asylum, 2006). He also practices in other areas of public law such as welfare/social security. He regularly teaches and writes in these areas. During 2007-2008Duran has been instructed as junior counsel in the following immigration and human rights cases of significance:
Huang & Kashmiri -v- SSHD [2007] UKHL; [2007] 2 AC 167 (HL)
This well known case concerns the approach of the Court to the Strasbourg concept of 'proportionality' and the intensity with which the Court must conduct its review of executive decisions in this area. The immediate context was Article 8(2) ECHR and the question whether 'true exceptionality' was the proper bench-mark before the immigration appellate authorities. Saadi -v- UK, Applcn No 13229/03, 29 January 2008 (Grand Chamber, European Court of Human Rights)
On 16 May 2007, Rick Scannell (also of these chambers) led Duran in the Grand Chamber to represent Dr Saadi in his challenge, under Art 5 ECHR, to his detention at Oakington Reception Centre. This case had previously been determined in the High Court, Court of Appeal and House of Lords (as well as the first Chamber of the ECtHR) and was a challenge to the Oakington Detention Centre regime - the flagship fast-track asylum processing centre - by which asylum seekers are detained for the administrative purpose of determining their claims. Judgment was given in January 2008. The Grand Chamber found: (1) unanimously, that there had been a breach of Art 5(2) (duty to provide reasons); but (2) by 11 votes to 6, there had been no breach of Art 5(1) (purpose of detention was within Art 5(1)(f)). F (Mongolia) -v- (1) AIT; (2) SSHD [2007] EWCA Civ 769 [2007] 1 WLR 2523, Times 28 August 2007
Duran was instructed on an intervention by the Public Law Project. The case concerned a challenge to the regime of statutory review whereby immigration applicants are prevented from access to the High Court by way of judicial review, which in the applicants submission, is a far more effective remedy (as it gives the right to an oral hearing by way of renewed permission applications). It was further submitted that the denial of immigration applicants in this context was discriminatory and contrary to Art 14 ECHR. The appeal was unsuccessful and the House of Lords subsequently refused permission to appeal. EB (Kosovo) -v- SSHD [2008] UKHL 41
The issue before their Lordships was the effect of Home Office administrative delays in decision-making in asylum claims with the result that the applicant puts down roots in the UK and established family and private life connections here under Art 8 ECHR. In May 2008, the House of Lords gave judgment for the appellant (EB), overturning the overly prescriptive approach to the relevance of such delays under Art 8(2) ECHR that had been set down by the Court of Appeal R (AC, by his litigation friend) -v- Secretary of State for Justice, C1/2008/0698, Court of Appeal, 28 July 2008,
with interventions by the Children's Commissioner, Equalities and Human Rights Commission and Hassockfield STC (interested parties) The Court of Appeal quashed the Secure Training Centre (Amendment) Rules 2007 which added to the criteria upon which physical restraint/removal from association can be used on children in secure training centres, that such powers could be triggered in order to ensure "good order and discipline". The Rules were quashed on the grounds that the Secretary of State had failed to consult the Children's Commissioner, or conduct a race equality impact assessment. In addition, the Court of Appeal held that the Rules were in violation of Articles 3 and 8 ECHR. The case also breaks ground in relation to the question of the exercise of the discretion of the Court to grant relief in judicial review proceedings. During 2007-2008, Duran has also appeared before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission and the High Court in control order cases. He has was also instructed to assist and advise on the analogy drawn with immigration/asylum cases in the leading family case of Byron which addressed the standard of proof in care cases under the Children Act. Duran has also been instructed during the year in applications before the European Court of Human Rights (raising issues under Arts 3, 5, 6 ECHR) by Russian nationals who claim that they have been subject to politically motivated prosecution for alleged offences of corruption and fraud. He has also been instructed on behalf of high profile Russian nationals in the UK seeking asylum from the regime in Russia where, again, the Russian authorities have made what are asserted to be politically motivated allegations of financial corruption. Duran advises in all areas of immigration and nationality. He has acted for clients from all fields of life, from international cricketers and basketball stars (such as Luol Deng and Ian Harvey) to impoverished Chagos Islanders seeking residence and support in the United Kingdom. PublicationsIn addition to his JCWI Handbook, Duran has written widely: CPAG's Migration and Social Security Benefits Handbook (two editions), Contributor to Halsbury's Laws, past contributor to Macdonald's Immigration Law & Practice and he is the author of numerous articles on immigration, asylum and welfare law. He also sits on the editorial board of Tolley's Immigration and Nationality Law & Practice. He has trained/lectured for, among many others, LAG, ILPA, Justice and Liberty Other activitiesDuran has regularly trained and lectured on the areas in which he practises. He trains on courses held by the Legal Action Group, JCWI and the Immigration Law Practitioners Association as well as providing in-house training and updates for solicitors firms and voluntary sector organisations. He has both designed and taught on the College of Law's Immigration optional course as part of the Bar finals examination. Duran is a member of ILPA and is on the editorial board of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law. Notable CasesEarlier significant and reported cases that Duran has been involved with include:- Szoma -v- Secretary of State for Social Security (2006) (House of Lords)
Asylum-seekers in the UK with temporary admission were 'lawfully present' under the relevant Income Support Regulations, themselves based on obligations under the Council of Europe Social Charter and the European Convention on Social and Medical Assistance and the R (S) -v- SSHD (2006)
The 'Afghan Hi-jackers' case: policy of Secretary of State to deny leave to asylum seekers successful in ECHR claim and to leave them in legal limbo was outwith the powers of the Immigration Act 1971 R v SSHD ex parte Mersin [2000] INLR 511
Principles relating to prejudicial delay in issuing immigration status papers Holub v SSHD [2001] 1 WLR 1359 CA
Right to education under Article 2, First Protocol ECHR and extra-territoriality of ECHR R v SSHD ex parte Onibiyo [1996] QB 768 CA
The foundation case establishing the concept of 'fresh' asylum claim and setting down the criteria making a fresh claim which was subsequently written into the Immigration Rules. R v Radiom & Shingara [1997] ECR I-3341 ECJ
Legal remedies under Council Directive (EEC) 64/221 for those excluded from reliance on EU rights of free movement Singh & Singh [2000] SIAC
Article 3 ECHR protection for those excluded from 1951 Refugee Convention for reasons related to terrorism Hafizullah Alymedi & 25 Afghan appellants (IAA) and R (SSHD) v IAT [2002] INLR 116
Afghan Stansted hi-jacked aircraft passenger asylum claims before appellate authority and Divisional Court R (Mani) v Lambeth LBC [2002] 5 CCLR 487
Access to s.21 1948 Act support; first instance R (Mambakasa) v SSHD [2003] CA
Test case on principles relating to damages for breaches of human rights, in particular Article 8 ECHR R (Alexis, Anamaly & Naraina) v West Sussex County Council
(Chagos Islanders granted citizenship under British Overseas Territories Act 2002 claims to community care support against local authority; outstanding before Administrative Court, 2003) Ex Parte Reffell
(test case concerning the right of access of foreign visitors to care under the national health service). (Last Updated: September 2009)
|
