Tag Archives: Judicial Review

Serious Breaches of Duties of Procedural Fairness and Candour by Home Office in Calais Children’s Cases

R (Citizens UK) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1812 (31 July 2018) These proceedings concerned Citizens UK’s appeal against Soole J’s decision that the expedited process adopted by the Home Office to assess the … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Asylum, Children, Court of Appeal, David Bolt, ECHR, Entry Clearance, European Union, Human Rights Act, Judicial Review, Rule of law | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Deemed Paternity and Discrimination: Section 50(9A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 is Incompatible with the ECHR

K (A Child) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWHC 1834 (Admin) (18 July 2018) Importantly, the Administrative Court has recently held that the scheme in section 50(9A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 which deemed … Continue reading

Posted in Article 14, Article 8, Children, Citizenship and Nationality, ECHR, Hostile Environment, Human Rights Act, Judicial Review, Spouses, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Culture Change’: How Fair is Hamid on Steroids?

Culture is a buzzword. Promoting “good culture” is seen as a cure for misconduct. For example, financial regulators blame “bad culture” and the accompanying toxic casino environment for causing the global financial crisis. Thus, financial regulators and banks are very … Continue reading

Posted in Asylum, Cases, Culture, Disclosure, ECHR, Entry Clearance, Judicial Review, Misconduct, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ending the Kumar Arrangements in Judicial Review

R (KA & Anor) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Ending of Kumar Arrangements) [2018] UKUT 201 (IAC) (13 June 2018) At times the courts take a lenient approach to governmental ineptitude and judges tend to throw a … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Children, Costs, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Immigration Rules, Judges, Judicial Review, Misconduct, Rule of law, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tier 1 (General): Perspectives on Paragraph 322(5) and ILR

Cases in the Tier 1 (General) category present an outrage because we would not really expect highly skilled migrants to be punished for being honest by paying their taxes. Similarly, we would also not expect migrants who add value to … Continue reading

Posted in Appeals, Article 8, Cases, ECHR, False Statements and Misrepresentations, Immigration Rules, Judicial Review, Misconduct, Pakistan, Paragraph 322(5), PBS, Post Study Work, Proportionality, Public Interest, Tier 1, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

High Court on British Citizenship and Fact Finding

R (Din) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWHC 1046 (Admin) (04 May 2018) These judicial review proceedings arose out of a trio of refusals – dated 14 July 2016, 16 December 2016 and 22 September 2017 … Continue reading

Posted in Article 6, Cases, Citizenship and Nationality, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Entry Clearance, False Statements and Misrepresentations, High Court, Human Rights Act, India, Judicial Review, Nationality, Pakistan, Visitors, Women | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Appeal Rights and EFMs: The Opinion in Banger

AG Bobek’s Opinion, SSHD v Rozanne Banger C‑89/17, ECLI:EU:C:2018:225 Appeal rights in a hostile environment are a profoundly important question. In the case of Banger (Unmarried Partner of British National: South Africa) [2017] UKUT 125 (IAC) a series of questions were referred to … Continue reading

Posted in Appeals, Article 6, Citizens Directive, Citizenship and Nationality, CJEU, ECHR, Judicial Review, OFMs, Proportionality, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment