The petitioner was a citizen of Sudan, who arrived and claimed asylum in the UK in June 2008; her claim for asylum was subsequently rejected in July 2008. By January 2009, she had become “appeal rights exhausted” and in December 2009, she requested the Secretary of State reconsider her application for asylum, indicating it was a fresh claim for asylum under Rule 353 of the Immigration Rules. Her new representations were not recognized by the UK Border Agency, on behalf of the Secreta ...
|
The petition was a national of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), who claimed she was a supporter of the Mouvement pour la Liberation du Congo (MLC) led by Jean Pierre Bemba. She claimed to have run a bar and restaurant in Kinshasa and that the premises were used for meetings during the 2006 election, and to hold mobile and satellite telephones on behalf of the party. She claimed that following the MLC’s defeat in the 2006, relations between the party and the government broke down, an ...
|
Petition for Judicial Review:- The petition and appellant was a citizen of Pakistan, who came to the UK in September 2006. He sought asylum on grounds of his persecution in Pakistan, as a result of his adherence to, and involvement in, the Ahmadi faith. His application at that time was refused, and subsequent appeals were also refused, with his appeal rights ending in May 2008. Thereafter, the petitioner had made further representations, which he considered constituted a fresh cl ...
|
HJ and HT are homosexual men – from Iran and Cameroon, respectively – who seek asylum in the United Kingdom on the basis that they would face the risk of persecution on grounds of sexual orientation if returned to their home countries.The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal, holding that the ‘reasonable tolerability’ test applied by the Court of Appeal is contrary to the Convention and should not be followed in the future. HJ and HT’s cases are remitted forreconsideration in light of the ...
|
Normal 0 In this action the appellants are citizens of Pakistan, Sikhs, and members of the same family. The first, second and third appellants arrived in the United Kingdom on 4 December 2006. The fourth appellant arrived three days later. They all claimed asylum in January 2007 and their applications were refused the following month. Under section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 they appealed to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. On 22 May 20 ...
|
The respondent is a Sri Lankan Tamil. In 1992, at the age of 10, he became a member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (“LTTE”), the following year joining the LTTE’s Intelligence Division. He occupied various positions of responsibility and gained promotions within the organisation. At 18 he was appointed to lead a mobile unit transporting military equipment and other members of the Intelligence Division through jungles to a point where armed members of the Division could ...
|
Supreme Court Press Summary – 26 November 2009 Background to the appeal BA and PE were each served a deportation order after unsuccessful appeals on human rights and asylum grounds against the decision to deport them. Both unsuccessfully made further submissions to the Secretary of State in an attempt to have the order revoked. They then applied to judicially review the decision not to revoke the deportation order, maintaining that their removal from the United Kingdom would be in breach ...
|
Application for Leave to Appeal:- On 20 November 2006 the applicant, an Iranian national who had fled from there, entered the United Kingdom. The applicant claimed asylum and breach of his protected rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and on 24 January 2007 the respondent refused his application. The applicant exercised his right of appeal which was rejected by the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal in a decision dated 21 June 2007. The applicant successfully applied for reconsider ...
|
Application for leave to appeal against a decision of an Immigration Judge of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal under Section 103B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002:- The appellant, an Iranian man born on 12 September 1971, entered the United Kingdom illegally on 1 February 2005 and sought asylum the following day. On 4 April 2005 the respondent decided that the appellant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution and that he did not qualify for asylum and conclud ...
|
The petitioner, a Nigerian national born 25 May 1980, sought judicial review of a decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department dated 7th August 2008 to refuse to treat the petitioner's representations based on further information as a fresh claim for asylum. The petitioner had arrived in the UK on 30 January 2006 and claimed asylum and breach of her human rights on 2 February 2006 which was refused on 11 May 2005. The petitioner appealed and an immigration judge dismissed the appea ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 |