Issue 33 - 6th November 2006

Monday 6 November 2006

Share This Page

Email This Page

Recent Caselaw

Fu (R on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] EWHC 2735 (Admin). Whether judicial review is available to a person aggrieved by a decision of the Asylum and Immigration Appeal Tribunal` where the statutory review procedure has been gone through and the claimant has failed. Application dismissed, but note that an application to the higher courts is expected

MG (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department 30/10/2006 Court of Appeal - An Asylum and Immigration Tribunal was entitled to hold that an Iranian asylum seeker's conversion to Christianity was unlikely to come to the attention of the Iranian authorities if he was returned and that even if it was likely to come to the attention of the authorities, there were no additional factors to show that he was at risk of persecution.

JM v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] EWCA Civ 1402 - the long awaited decision challenging the AIT’s starred tribunal decision JM Liberia on whether a human rights appeal was before the court where no removal directions had been set and therefore no imminent removal threatened - the Court of Appeal, overturning the AIT’s decision, concluded that the phrase “in consequence ofï¿¢ïx€ïx? in s 84(1)(g), was to interpreted widely and not narrowly as the AIT had done. The Court also found that it was wrong in principle that the price of getting before an independent tribunal, for a judicial decision on a human rights claim should be the commission of a criminal offence and other associated legal prohibitions, the inevitable consequences of an appellant remaining in the UK without the lawful leave.

Thet v Director of Public Prosecutions [2006] EWHC 2701 (Admin) The Court found that the word "document" in the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 s.2(3) and s.2.(6)(b) referred to a genuine document and not a false document; and that a natural reading of s.2 lead to the construction of s.2(6)(b) that a defendant who was able to put forward a reasonable excuse for not being in possession of a genuine document referred to in s.2(1) was entitled to rely on the defence contained in s.2(6)(b). Accordingly, given the factual findings of the judge, that T was unable to obtain a genuine passport, he should have been acquitted.

KG (Review of current situation) Nepal CG [2006] UKAIT 00076 Country Guidance – 1. The fact that conditions in a country are unstable or fluid does not necessarily mean the AIT will avoid producing country guidance decisions relating to risk categories in that country. 2. Generally speaking and given recent developments, it would only be in the exceptional case that an appellant could show a continuing risk of persecution or serious harm or treatment contrary to Article 3 by virtue of being perceived by the authorities in Nepal as a Maoist. 3. Similarly, it will only be in very limited cases that a person would be able to show he or she faces risk in his or her home area at the hands of the Maoists. 4. However, even those able to show a risk (from Maoists) on return to their home area (such as businessmen, industrialists and entrepeneurs), will generally have a viable internal relocation alternative in Kathmandu. Only in an exceptional case would this not be so.


The Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 (Commencement No.3) Order 2006 - Article 3 of this Order brings into force on 13th November 2006 section 9 (abandonment of appeal) of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. Article 4 brings into force section 58 (acquisition of British nationality, etc.) of that Act on 4th December 2006.

The provisions commenced by Article 4 of the Order will not have effect in relation to an application for registration made before 4th December 2006

Upcoming events

Benefits Overview and Update with Ranjiv Khubber

London - 16th November - Birmingham - 28th November

London: Room 1.21, Kings College London, Waterloo Campus, Franklin Wilkins Building, Stamford Street London SE1 9NH - 16 November 2006 - 4.00pm to 7.00pm

Birmingham: Room 16, The Birmingham and Midland Institute, Margaret Street, BirminghamB3 3BS - 28 November 2006 - 4.00pm to 7.00pm - 3 hours CPD credit

Fees: £99.00 plus VAT per delegate, £60.00 plus VAT per delegate for Not for Profit, Academics, Pupil Barristers, Trainee Solicitors and Students


Introduction to the Judicial Review and Cutting Edge Issues in Judicial Review plus Update on recent developments Venue: Garden Court Chambers, 57-60 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3LS

Date: 8 December 2006 - 9.30am to 4.30pm (6 hours CPD credit)

Speakers: Various (Further details to be announced)

Fees: £250.00 plus VAT per delegate (no concessions)


Date: 31 January 2007 - 9.30am to 4.30pm (6 hours CPD credit)

Speakers: Various (Further details to be announced)

Venue: Garden Court Chambers, 57-60 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3LS

Fees: £250.00 plus VAT per delegate (no concessions)

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

+ View more awards