Immigration Law Bulletin - Issue 313 – 25 February 2013

Monday 25 February 2013

Share This Page

Email This Page

News

On his trip to India the Prime Minister announced details of a super priority visa service which will allow frequent travellers from India to have their visas processed in just one day. To read further click here.

Cases

MA, BT, DA v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C‑648/11) (Advocate General's Opinion: 21 February 2013)
Advocate General Cruz Villalón has given his opinion in the case of three unaccompanied minors, facing (hypothetical) removal from the UK under the Dublin II Regulation, referred to the CJEU by the English Court of Appeal (see Immigration Legal Bulletin issue number 254). Art 6 of the Regulation provides:
"Where the applicant for asylum is an unaccompanied minor, the Member State responsible for examining the application shall be that where a member of his or her family is legally present, provided that this is in the best interest of the minor.
"In the absence of a family member, the Member State responsible for examining the application shall be that where the minor has lodged his or her application for asylum
."
In the A-G's opinion the Member State responsible for determining the application for asylum pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 6 of the Regulation must, in principle, having regard to the minor's best interests, and unless those interests require otherwise, be the Member State where the most recent application has been lodged.
To read the full opinion click here.

L.N. v Styrelsen for Videregående Uddannelser og Uddannelsesstøtt (Case C-46/12) (21 February 2013)
In finding that Arts 7(1)(c) and 24(2) of the 'Citizens Directive' 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that an EU citizen who pursues a course of studies in a host Member State whilst at the same time pursuing effective and genuine employment activities such as to confer on him the status of 'worker' within the meaning of Art 45 TFEU may not be refused maintenance aid for studies which is granted to the nationals of that Member State, the CJEU held that the fact that the person entered the territory of the host Member State with the principal intention of pursuing a course of study is not relevant for determining whether he is a 'worker' within the meaning of Article 45 TFEU.
To read the full judgment click here.

Amirifard, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 279 (19 February 2013)
The Iranian refugee claimant with ILR was refused naturalisation on bad character grounds owing to his association with crimes against humanity whilst a conscripted prison guard in Iran. His rationality challenge to this decision (he had gone AWOL, been tortured, had fled Iran and had done nothing to impugn his character over 11 years in the UK) was rejected by Lang J: the SSHD is required to make an evaluation of the applicant's character on the basis of the material before her, having proper regard to the guidance in the Nationality Instructions. The onus is on the claimant to satisfy the SSHD that he is of good character and it is not for the SSHD to establish that the claimant personally committed a crime for which he could be tried before the International Criminal Court, and the test is not the same as the test for exclusion from protection under Art 1F of the Refugee Convention. Although the Secretary of State must exercise her powers reasonably, essentially the test for disqualification is subjective and the claimant failed to establish that the SSHD's decision was irrational.
To read the full judgment click here.

Durani v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Nottinghamshire County Council [2013] EWHC 284 (Admin) (19 February 2013)
Walker J found in favour of the Afghan claimant's arguments that the local authority's age assessment in his case had obviously not complied with the principles for such assessments identified in R (B) v Merton LBC [2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin) and that the SSHD had not been entitled to rely on the assessment in concluding that he had been of an age suitable for detention such that his detention had been unlawful.
To read the full judgment click here.

AB, Re Judicial Review [2013] CSOH 20 (5 February 2013)
Lord Stewart considered the difficulties in determining the first of Lord Roger's questions in HJ (Iran): "When an applicant applies for asylum on the ground of a well-founded fear of persecution because he is gay, the tribunal must first ask itself whether it is satisfied on the evidence that he is gay, or that he would be treated as gay by potential persecutors in his country of nationality." Per Lord Stewart: "UKBA has the task of sorting genuine from bogus homosexual asylum claims: but is it acceptable for the state and its agencies to carry out an inquisition into people's sexuality; and, anyway, how are decision-makers supposed to satisfy themselves that claimants really are gay? The Supreme Court has given no practical guidance." In the instant case he held that the SSHD's rejection of the petitioner's purported fresh claim for asylum was flawed for failure to take account of mental health evidence submitted in support of the claim for "sexual asylum".
To read the full judgment click here.

Events

Initiating and Running an Immigration Judicial Review
ILPA, Tuesday 26 February 2013, 2pm in Birmingham

This session is aimed at those experienced in any aspect of immigration law but no or little experiencing of judicial review.
Click here for more information.

Nationality law is fun
ILPA, Wednesday 27 February 2013, 10am in Birmingham

Tutor: Alison Harvey, ILPA. The session is aimed at practitioners who want to develop their understanding of nationality law and who are interested in more than making applications for citizenship.
Click here for more information.

European Law Update
On Tuesday 26 February, 4pm, London

HJT Training presents an Update on EEA Law: A review of developments, both domestic and European, in the law that concerns European migration. Any immigration lawyer needs a good understanding of the European Union law impact on their client's status.
Click here for more information.

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, and has been described as "pre-eminent" by Lord Brown. 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.

 

Latest tweets from Garden Court Chambers

Follow us on Twitter

Tweets by gardencourtlaw

We are top ranked by independent legal directories and consistently win awards

+ View more awards