“The Home Office has been ordered by the high court to pay compensation to four torture survivors who were unlawfully held in British immigration detention centres.”
The Guardian, 21st May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“SL v Westminster [2013] UKSC 27 is a very important case concerning the meaning of ‘care and attention’ in the context of s.21, National Assitance Act 1948.”
NearlyLegal, 20th May 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“The government has today launched calls for evidence on the balance of powers between the UK and the European Union on asylum and immigration, and on the Free Movement of Persons.”
Home Office, 16th May 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
“Immigration has proved a toxic issue for recent Home Office ministers. In 2004 home secretary David Blunkett resigned following revelations that a visa application had been fast-tracked. Immigration minister Beverley Hughes resigned after admitting she ‘unwittingly’ misled people about a suspected visa ‘scam’. Charles Clarke resigned as home secretary in 2006 after intense pressure over the release of foreign prisoners who could have been deported at the end of their custodial term.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 20th May 2013
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“Hundreds of people who were tortured before seeking asylum in the UK could seek compensation and release from immigration detention.”
BBC News, 17th May 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Radical cleric Abu Qatada will launch a fresh bid for freedom today as he seeks to be released from prison at an immigration tribunal.”
The Independent, 20th May 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“A London council has had to pay out more than £1m in costs for wrongly assessing asylum seeker children as adults. These wrong decisions have condemned some children to homelessness, prevented them from going to school and led to some being unlawfully held in adult detention centres.”
The Guardian, 17th May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Ahmadi v Secretary of State for the Home Department: [2013] EWCA Civ 512; [2013] WLR (D) 170
“Where a notice of immigration decision contained combined notice of both a refusal of an application for variation of leave to remain and a decision that the applicant should be removed by way of directions under section 47 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006, the removal decision was invalid.”
WLR Daily, 9th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
SL (FC) (Respondent) v Westminster City Council (Appellant) [2013] UKSC 27 | UKSC 2011/0229 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 9th May 2013
“The Home Office Discretionary Leave policy and instruction document (issued 27 October 2009) was not capable of being read and applied in a way which was compliant with section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 and the associated jurisprudence.”
WLR Daily, 8th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Alarape and another v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C-529/11); [2013] WLR (D) 168
“The parent of a child who had attained the age of majority and who had obtained access to education on the basis of article 12 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 (as amended by Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC) could continue to have a derived right of residence under that article if the child remained in need of the presence and care of that parent in order to be able to continue and to complete his or her education, which was for the referring court to assess, taking into account all the circumstances of the case before it. Periods of residence in a host member state which were completed by family members of a Union citizen who were not nationals of a member state solely on the basis of article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 could not be taken into consideration for the purposes of acquisition by those family members of a right of permanent residence.”
WLR Daily, 8th May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The culture of using meritless judicial review applications to delay immigration decisions and hold up development will be attacked by new controls announced today [7 May] by Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.”
Ministry of Justice, 7th May 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
“A judge’s decision to allow a convicted drug dealer who abandoned his children
the right to stay in Britain over his ‘human rights’ is at the centre of
mounting political protest.”
Daily Telegraph, 27th April 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The culture of using meritless judicial review applications to delay immigration decisions and hold up development will be attacked by new controls announced today by Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.”
Ministry of Justice, 23rd April 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
“Ministers are to unveil controls aimed at tackling judicial reviews in English courts that hold up building projects and delay immigration decisions.”
BBC News, 23rd April 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The Home Office was successful in defending Immgiration Rules changes introduced to test migrant’s English language capabilities”
Home Office, 17th April 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
“The requirement that a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or person settled in the United Kingdom produce a test certificate of knowledge of the English language to a prescribed standard prior to entering the United Kingdom was proportionate.”
WLR Daily, 12th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The Home Office was successful in defending Immgiration Rules changes introduced to test migrants English language capabilities.”
Home Office, 16th April 2013
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
Regina v Asmeron [2013] EWCA Crim 435; [2013] WLR (D) 135
“Where a defendant was charged with an offence of entering the United Kingdom without a passport, contrary to section 2 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004, the court could only rule that the defendant’s explanation for so doing was incapable in law of amounting to a good reason or a reasonable excuse if it could properly be said, on the true construction of the Act, that it would be inconsistent with the essential nature and purpose of the offence for the defendant’s explanation to be capable of amounting to a defence. The fact that a defence might be considered hopeless on the merits was not a good reason for a judge to withdraw it from the jury.”
WLR Daily, 11th April 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025