Issue 54 - 28th May 2007

Monday 28 May 2007

Share This Page

Email This Page

News from Parliament

The Asylum (Designated States) Order 2007
The order adds a number of States to the list in Section 94(4) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.That provisions concerns appeal rights for "unfounded human rights and asylum claims". Under section 94(2), a person may not bring an appeal under section 82(1) while in the United Kingdom where he has made a human rights or asylum claim, or both, and the Secretary of State certifies that the claim is, or the claims are, clearly unfounded. The Secretary of State shall issue a certificate under section 94(2) if he is satisfied that the claimant is entitled to reside in a State listed in section 94(4), unless he is satisfied that the claim is not clearly unfounded. This Order adds Bosnia-Herzegovina, Mauritius, Montenegro, Peru and Serbia to the list in section 94(4). This Order also adds Gambia, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Mali and Sierra Leone, in respect of men, to that list.

News from the Courts

House of Lords

AL(Serbia) v Secretary of State for Home Department [2006] EWCA Civ 161. The Appeal Committee of the House granted leave to appeal to the Appellant in on 17 May 2007 (see Court of Appeal judgment)
The Appellant argues that he has been unlawfully discriminated against as an unaccompanied minor asylum seeker who did not obtain the benefit of being granted indefinite leave to remain in line with the SSHD's "one off concession" (or the family amnesty) announced on 24 October 2003.

Court of Appeal

The Secretary of State for the Home Department v Baiai and others [2007] EWCA Civ 478
Following the implementation of Section 19 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004 non-EEA nationals with limited leave to remain must obtain a fiancé visa, or have the SSHD's permission to marry (a certificate of approval), before being married in a legally recognised ceremony in the UK. Home Office policy was to refuse people with less than six months' valid leave to remain a certificate of approval and effectively treat them as seeking to enter marriages of convenience even where they were able to demonstrate, if given a chance, that they had no such intention. The Court of Appeal held that the scheme was contrary to Articles 12 and 14 ECHR in that it was disproportionate to the objective of preventing marriages of convenience for immigration benefit and that it discriminated against non-Anglicans by exempting marriages in Anglican churches from the scheme. The fact that the person might be unlawfully in the UK did not make the scheme any more permissible. More info

([2007] EWCA Civ 514). The majority in the Court of Appeal finds that the AIT is had not, in determining whether there was an Art.8(1) interference, set a higher than normal threshold, whether of exceptionality or otherwise. The majority considered the evidence was capable of supporting the AIT's finding that the Appellant had not established a real risk of committing suicide if returned to Iraq and that, accordingly, he had not established the claimed interference with his Article 8(1) rights. Sedley LJ dissenting found that the AIT had erred in its assessment of availability of treatment in Iraq to help the Appellant control his depression and suicidal impulses and erred in its finding on Article 8(2) More info

Asylum and Immigration Tribunal

OM (Returning citizens - minorities - religion) Uzbekistan CG [2007] UKAIT 00045
Country Guidance case on Uzbekistan. The AIT finds that it has not been established that Uzbek citizens whose passports expire cannot obtain a renewal from Embassies abroad, or that returnees who have been abroad for longer than permitted by an exit visa, are at real risk of disproportionate punishment on return. It further finds there is no satisfactory evidence that non-Uzbeks face discrimination of such a nature as to amount to persecution, or serious harm, or a breach of their article 3 rights.


Making applications for self employed Turkish nationals
Wednesday 6 June 2007,
London ILPA office, 4-7.15pm
Speakers Liz Barratt, Bindman and Partners
Nicola Rogers, Garden Court Chambers
Book via ILPA:

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

+ View more awards