Tag Archives: Removals

Has Chavez-Vilchez altered the approach to derivative claims for residence in the UK?

Sarmiento and Sharpston view Zambrano (C-34/09, EU:C:2011:124), which caused a stir because of the substance of rights test, as a “high-water mark” in the CJEU’s jurisprudence. Thereafter, the court began to suffer from “citizenship exhaustion” and the “test was shelved … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix EU, Article 8, CFR, Children, Citizens Directive, CJEU, Court of Appeal, ECHR, European Union, Families, Immigration Rules, Netherlands, Pakistan, Settlement, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Analysis of the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill

The crushing defeat suffered by Theresa May because of the rejection her Brexit Deal has left the UK in utter chaos. Uncertainty looms large in all spheres of UK life but the government is determined to carry through with Brexit … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix EU, Brexit, Citizens Directive, Citizenship and Nationality, CJEU, European Union, Immigration Rules, Permanent Residence, Students, Windrush, Working | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Court of Appeal holds that a ‘rolling review’ is acceptable

R (Spahiu) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 2604 (28 November 2018) Adding to the vast expanse of technical judicial review litigation, this judgment concerns a protracted dispute between a failed asylum-seeker and the Home … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Asylum, Court of Appeal, Culture, ECHR, Judicial Review, Removals, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Article 8 and Private Life: Supreme Court Confirms Bright-line Interpretation of ‘Precarious’ in Section 117B(5) of NIAA 2002

Rhuppiah v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] UKSC 58 (14 November 2018) In interpreting the meaning of “precarious” in section 117B(5) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (as amended), whereby little weight should be given to … Continue reading

Posted in Article 8, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Immigration Act 2014, Immigration Rules, Precariousness, Proportionality, Settlement, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Article 8 and Paposhvili: Guidance in GS (India) is Correct

SL (St Lucia) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1894 (07 August 2018) The important judgment in Paposhvili v Belgium [2016] ECHR 1113 caused quite a stir when it was delivered. However, its effects … Continue reading

Posted in Article 3, Article 8, Court of Appeal, Immigration Rules, Medical Cases, Precariousness, Proportionality, Public Interest, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Court of Appeal: ‘Indiscriminate Methods of Warfare’ in Gaza

MI (Palestine) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1782 (31 July 2018) Holding that it is sufficiently arguable that the situation in Gaza is attributable to direct and indirect actions of parties to the conflict … Continue reading

Posted in Article 3, Asylum, Automatic Deportation, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Egypt, Gaza, Israel, Palestine, Persecution, Politics, Somalia, Terrorism, Tribunals | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Article 8 After Agyarko: The Correct Approach

TZ (Pakistan) and PG (India) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1109 (17 May 2018) These appeals were heard after the Supreme Court’s decision in R (Agyarko) [2017] UKSC 11 (see here) which made it … Continue reading

Posted in Appendix FM, Article 8, Court of Appeal, ECHR, Families, Human Rights Act, Immigration Act 2014, Immigration Rules, India, Pakistan, Proportionality, Public Interest, Tribunals, UKSC | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments