Petition for Judicial Review of a Decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department dated 20 January 2009:- The petitioner arrived in the United Kingdom in July 2000 and claimed asylum which was refused on 16 May 2001 and an appeal was dismissed on 22 January 2002. His application for permission to appeal to the Tribunal was refused in March 2002. The petitioner was found on 1 March 2007 working at the Rupee Room in Ayr and stated his name as Rashpal Singh, born 8 July 1979. Subsequent ...
|
Petition for Judicial Review of a Decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department dated 12 December 2008:- The petitioner arrived in the United Kingdom on 27 August 1999 as the holder of a work permit valid until 5 September 1999. He failed to leave the country on the expiration of that permit and was subsequently found working illegally at the Amritsar restaurant in Kirkcaldy on 13 October 2001. Having been served with illegal entry papers he claimed asylum on 17 October 2001. That c ...
|
This case turns on the construction of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules 2006, which came into force on 3 April 2006. Until then, a foreigner with any medical qualification was entitled to apply for leave to remain in the UK as a postgraduate doctor. The new rule confined the entitlement to those with medical qualifications from UK institutions. Did the new rule apply to all cases in which leave still had to be granted? Or only to doctors who had not yet applied? The distinction was ...
|
This was an application for leave to appeal under Section 103(b) of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 against a decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, dated 17 September 2007, which refused leave to appeal against a decision of the Tribunal dated 4 July 2007. The applicant had fled from the Sudan to the United Kingdom on 21 November 2005 and applied for asylum here. The Secretary of State for the Home Department rejected the application and he appealed to an Immigrat ...
|
Here the petitioner, a 29 year old Sudanese national, sought judicial review of a decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department dated 25 May 2007 certifying that the petitioner had no right of appeal in relation to claims for asylum and violation of his ECHR rights. The petitioner arrived in the UK on 22 September 2004 and claimed asylum and violation of his ECHR rights. His claims were rejected and he appealed to an Immigration Adjudicator who rejected his claim. The petitioner sou ...
|
Mr Nasseri is an Afghan national who crossed into Greece in Dec 2004 and claimed asylum. The application was rejected in April 2005. By then he may already have been on his way to the UK, which he entered in September 2005 concealed under a lorry. When detected he again claimed asylum. Council Reg (EC) No 343/2003 (“the Dublin II Regulation”) provides in art.10 that if an asylum seeker has crossed the border from a third country into a Member State, that Member State, and only that ...
|
Application for Leave to Appeal under Section 103B of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002:- On 2 December 2005 the appellant applied to the respondent for indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom. On 16 February 2006 the application was refused. The appellant appealed against that decision to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal on the ground that the decision was unlawful under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, as being incompatible with the appellant's Convention right ...
|
Application for Leave to Appeal:- The appellant was a 41 year old woman from the Democratic Republic of Congo who claimed asylum on 18 October 2004. The claim was refused by the respondent on 28 November 2004. She appealed unsuccessfully to an Adjudicator, but a Senior Immigration Judge, and the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ordered a reconsideration because it was held that the Adjudicator had:- (1) failed to set out the requisite standard of proof; (2) failed to deal with the background mate ...
|
The petitioner, an Iraqi national, arrived in the United Kingdom during 2000 and claimed asylum. He was granted indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom, however, was convicted at Plymouth Crown Court and sentenced to three years imprisonment and recommended for deportation. On 31 August 2007 the petitioner was due to be released, however, the respondent served him with a notice that she intended to make a deportation order and detained him under the Immigration Act 1971. Here the petiti ...
|
In December 2005 the Secretary of State rejected the respondent’s asylum and human rights claims and certified that they were clearly unfounded under s.94(2) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. The respondent was then served with a decision under s.82(2)(h) to remove him from the UK as an illegal immigrant. Twice in 2006 he made further submissions in support of his claims. In November 2006, the Secretary of State maintained her certification of the claims under s.94. It w ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 |