“An Islamic fanatic linked with Abu Qatada will stay in the UK even though the Supreme Court has ruled he should not be granted asylum.”
Daily Telegraph, 21st November 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Senior UK Border Agency officials have been accused of misleading parliament after a damning report said they wrongly claimed they had dealt with a backlog of asylum and immigration claims – and that at one point more than 100,000 items of post about such cases remained unopened.”
The Guardian, 22nd November 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Lawyers could be disciplined for not disclosing ‘all material facts’ in legal bids to halt removal of asylum seekers, a senior judge has said.”
BBC News, 19th November 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Where an unaccompanied young person claimed asylum in the United Kingdom and applied to a local authority for the provision of services as a child in need under section 20 of the Children Act 1989, to determine whether that claimant was a child separate assessments were required for immigration purposes and for services from a local authority. The local authority was not bound by the finding of the Home Secretary as to the age of the claimant either under domestic or EU law.”
WLR Daily, 7th November 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
K v Bundesasylamt: Case C-245/11; [2012] WLR (D) 309
“On the proper construction of article 15(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 (establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the member state responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the member states by a third country national), a member state which was not responsible for examining an application for asylum pursuant to the criteria laid down in Chapter III of the Regulation became so responsible where there were humanitarian grounds for the application. In those circumstances, it was for the member state which had become the responsible member state to assume the obligations which went along with that responsibility and inform the member state previously responsible.”
WLR Daily, 6th November 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“‘Soft-touch Britain: the asylum capital of Europe’; ‘Refugees made our lives hell too, say neighbours’; and “DNA test for bogus refugees scrapped as expensive flop”. All are headlines that have appeared recently in the UK press, despite it now being almost a decade since the Press Complaints Commission first heard from charities on why coverage like this should stop. And despite it now being almost a decade since the PCC issued guidance to address what it agreed was widespread inaccurate reporting.”
The Guardian, 31st October 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Persons who had sought, or been granted, asylum in Italy but had since come to the United Kingdom could not resist return to Italy on the ground that they faced inhuman or degrading treatment there unless it could be shown that there was a systemic deficiency in the system of refugee protection in that country. Short of such evidence, in respect of which the view of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’) was pre-eminent, even powerful evidence of individual risk was of no avail.”
WLR Daily, 17th October 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A member state in receipt of an application for asylum was obliged to grant the minimum conditions for reception of asylum seekers laid down in Directive 2003/9/EC even where it decided, under Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003, to call upon another member state, as the member state responsible for examining the application for asylum, to take charge of or take back that applicant. This obligation ceased when that same applicant was actually transferred by the requesting member state, and the financial burden of granting those minimum conditions was to be assumed by that requesting member state, which was subject to that obligation.”
WLR Daily, 27th September 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The High Court has ruled that the failure to consider the continued detention of a mentally ill failed asylum seeker in accordance with immigration policy rendered his detention unlawful in part.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th October 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Supporters of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange face a wait to see if they will be asked to forfeit £140,000 of bail sureties after he sought asylum.”
BBC News, 3rd October 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Children who come to the UK alone to seek asylum find the experience confusing, stressful and traumatic, a report suggests.”
BBC News, 21st September 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The UK is to go ahead with a mass removal of Tamils to Sri Lanka next week despite mounting evidence from human rights group that many of them could be tortured on their return.”
The Guardian, 14th September 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Today I am talking to Carl Gardner, ex government lawyer and author of The Head of Legal blog, about the Assange Asylum issue.”
Charon QC, 17th August 2012
Source: www.charonqc.wordpress.com
“Charon QC” is the blogging pseudonym of Mike Semple Piggot, editor of insitelaw newswire.
“The Foreign Office says it can revoke an embassy’s diplomatic status but Ecuador claims this is only if there is a public threat.”
The Guardian, 16th August 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The latest twist in the Julian Assange case, as we await Ecuador’s decision on granting him asylum (a decision which would not, as I’ve written before, in itself allow protection from arrest if he steps outside the embassy), is that people are wondering whether the UK can simply strip the embassy of its diplomatic status, so allowing police officers to enter it.”
Head of Legal, 15th August 2012
Source: www.headoflegal.com
“Along with many others, today I find myself emerging from an Olympic haze. And alongside that morning-after blur comes a nagging feeling that it is time to get back to blogging. Why not start with a man who has watched the last three Olympic Games during what the High Court describes as an ‘enormously lengthy’ period of detention without charge, and whose last bail application was refused as it would be too difficult to keep track of him during the 2012 Olympics?”
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th August 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to grant an claimant, whose claim for judicial review of a removal order had been rejected by Upper Tribunal, a stay of his removal until his application for permission to appeal had been considered by the Court of Appeal.”
WLR Daily, 27th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The Secretary of State’s duty to endeavour to trace the family members of an unaccompanied minor seeking asylum was not discharged by merely informing the child of the facilities of the Red Cross. A failure to discharge the duty might be relevant to judicial consideration of an asylum or humanitarian protection claim. Such failure might also be relevant to a consideration of the duty under section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009.”
WLR Daily, 25th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A claim for asylum should not be defeated on the ground that an individual who had no political views, and who therefore did not support the persecutory regime in his home country, would lie and feign loyalty to that regime in order to avoid the persecutory ill treatment to which he would otherwise be subjected.”
WLR Daily, 25th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A claimant affected by, but not party to, a country guidance determination which was under appeal to the Court of Appeal was not entitled to an automatic stay of removal pending the outcome of the appeal. It was in the court’s discretion to grant a stay, but the court should not stay removal pending the decision of the Court of Appeal unless the claimant had adduced a clear and coherent body of evidence that the findings of the tribunal were in error.”
WLR Daily, 13th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025