News
UKBA have published new guides on coming to the UK to watch the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. To read further click here.
Cases
HA (Nigeria), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 979 (Admin) (17 April 2012)
In concluding that the claimant's immigration detention during two periods in 2010 had been unlawful, Singh J held, inter alia, that the policy introduced on 26 August 2010 in relation to detention of people with mental illness was unlawful in breach of the Defendant's duties under section 71 of the Race Relations Act 1976 and section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005; and that during these periods, the claimant's detention was in all the circumstances incompatible with his Art 3 ECHR rights as constituting degrading treatment given his mental ill-health.
To read the full judgment click here.
AM, R (on the application of) v Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (AAJR) [2012] UKUT 00118 (IAC) (17 April 2012)
The UTIAC sitting in its judicial review jurisdiction in an age dispute case held that in light of the CA judgment in R (CD) v Cardiff County Council, the claimant has only a minimal hurdle (legal burden) to overcome in obtaining permission (see R (FZ) v Croydon LBC) and none at all in the substantive hearing. The UTIAC made some 'general observations' about the impact of evidence of various sorts and from various sources in age assessment cases.
To read the full determination click here
AX (family planning scheme) China CG [2012] UKUT 00097 (IAC) (16 April 2012)
In dismissing the female Chinese appellant's appeal on its refugee asylum and HP grounds, whilst allowing it on Article 8 grounds, the UTIAC has given country guidance on the application of, and risk factors appertaining to, China's family planning policy.
To read the full determination click here.
Jarusevicius (EEA Reg 21 - effect of imprisonment) [2012] UKUT 00120 (IAC) (17 April 2012)
In the case of a Lithuanian national appealing against a decision to deport him, the UTIAC noted that whilst a period of imprisonment does not count towards accruing five years lawful residence in order to obtain a permanent right of residence under EEA Regs 2006 reg 15, the learning of the CJEU suggests that the continuity of residence for the purpose of reg 21(4) (10 years residence) is not broken by a period of imprisonment and that may mean that the decisions of the AIT in LG and CC (Italy) and of the UTIAC in SO (Nigeria) - that in addition to not counting towards the five year period, prison also broke the continuity of residence for that period - may have to be re-examined. Obiter the UTIAC also considered that whilst an offence of conspiracy to handle stolen goods would be most unlikely to give rise to imperative grounds of public policy (reg 21(4)) the FTT had been entitled to conclude in this case that it amounted to serious grounds (reg 21(3)).
To read the full determination click here.
MB (admissible evidence; interview records) Iran [2012] UKUT 00019 (IAC) (17 April 2012)
The UTIAC held that R (Dirshe) v SSHD is not authority for the proposition that where a claimant requests tape-recording of an interview, but that is not carried out, the record is inadmissible and that Cadder v Her Majesty's Advocate has no application to the admissibility of asylum interview records, immigration proceedings being of a distinct nature to criminal proceedings and admission of interview records does not breach a claimant's right to a fair trial. Tribunals do not have a general discretion to refuse to receive relevant evidence on the basis of procedural defects as to how it was obtained and apart from circumstances where lateness of the evidence means it is unfair to receive it, issues of fairness go to the weight to be attached to evidence, not admissibility.
To read the full determination click here.
Immigration Law Training
Immigration update - The Sequel: Were we warned?
Thursday 26th April, 4-7pm
Garden Court's and HJT Training's David Jones will be leading a course on reviewing the key changes in the world of immigration over the last 6 months, with particular attention being given to the 6 April changes to the Immigration Rules.
For more information, click here.
Immigration Law Books
Garden Court Chambers immigration team members are authors of numerous books which we mention from time to time.
Asylum Law and Practice (2nd edition)
The second edition of Asylum Law and Practice by Mark Symes and Peter Jorro is published. Price: £138.00. For full details, click here.
Fransman's British Nationality Law (3rd edition)
The third edition of Fransman's British Nationality Law, written by Laurie Fransman QC and with contributions from Adrian Berry and Alison Harvey, was published in spring 2011. Price: £295.00. For full details, click here.
Macdonald's Immigration Law & Practice (8th edition)
The eighth edition of Macdonald's Immigration Law & Practice was written by Ian Macdonald QC with contributions from many members of the Garden Court Immigration Team. Price: £230.00. For full details, click here.
Human Trafficking Handbook
Nadine Finch has contributed to the Human Trafficking Handbook: Recognising Trafficking and Modern-Day Slavery in the UK. Price: £34.99. For full details, click here.
