Commitment and contradiction in immigration law

Legal Studies ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. K. Marrington

UK immigration law is changing rapidly. There have been four major revisions of the immigration rules since 1979, interspersed with numerous minor, but none the less significant, amendments. Moreover, in an increasingly complex field, litigation has flourished. Applications for judicial review have been lodged at a rate which has recently prompted the Court of Appeal to severely restrict access to the court - in all but the most exceptional cases - until the statutory appeal process has been thoroughly exhausted. One consequence of this level of activity has been that the provisions under which family members may join their relatives in the United Kingdom have changed radically during the short life of the Immigration Act 1971.

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 270
Author(s):  
Diana Marín Consarnau

 Resumen: El objeto del presente trabajo es examinar el difícil encaje de la jurisprudencia del TJUE sobre el alcance de protección de los arts. 20 y 21 TFUE con el Derecho de extranjería interno en referencia a los derechos de residencia de los familiares de los ciudadanos de la Unión, especialmente en aquellas regulaciones que promueven la discriminación inversa con carácter directo, como ocurre en el Reino Unido e incluso indirecto, como resulta en el caso español.Palabras clave: ciudadanía de la Unión, derechos de residencia, miembros de la familia, discrimi­nación inversa directa e indirecta.Abstract: The aim of this report is to study the difficulties in practice to link the CJEU criteria related to the art. 20 and 21 TFEU with the national Immigration Law in the field of derived rights of residence for the family members of the Union citizens, specially in those regulations that promote the reverse discrimination with direct effects, as in the United Kingdom, and even indirectly, as it results in the Spanish case.Keywords: EU citizenship, residence rights, family members, direct and indirect reverse discri­mination.


1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 551-564
Author(s):  
Dawn Oliver

First, I want to express my gratitude and sense of honour in being invited to deliver the Lionel Cohen lecture for 1995. The relationship between the Israeli and the British legal systems is a close and mutually beneficial one, and we in Britain in particular owe large debts to the legal community in Israel. This is especially the case in my field, public law, where distinguished academics have enriched our academic literature, notably Justice Zamir, whose work on the declaratory judgment has been so influential. Israeli courts, too, have made major contributions to the development of the common law generally and judicial review very notably.In this lecture I want to discuss the process of constitutional reform in the United Kingdom, and to explore some of the difficulties that lie in the way of reform. Some quite radical reforms to our system of government — the introduction of executive agencies in the British civil service, for instance—have been introduced without resort to legislation. There has been a spate of reform to local government and the National Health Service.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Weil ◽  
Nicholas Handler

Over the past decade, the United Kingdom has deprived an increasing number of British subjects of their citizenship. This policy, known as “denaturalization,” has been applied with particular harshness in cases where foreign-born subjects have been accused of terrorist activity. The increase is part of a global trend. In recent years, Canada, Australia, France, and the Netherlands have either debated or enacted denaturalization statutes. But Britain remains an outlier among Western democracies. Since 2006, the United Kingdom home secretary has revoked the citizenship of at least 373 Britons, of whom at least 53 have had alleged links to terrorism. This is more than the total number of revocations by Canada, France, Australia, and Netherlands combined. These developments are troubling, as the right to be secure in one's citizenship has been a cornerstone of the postwar European liberal political order, and of the international community's commitment to human rights.


Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi

This concluding chapter identifies the four major causes of the growth and origin of judicial review in the G-20 common law countries and in Israel. First, the need for a federalism umpire, and occasionally a separation of powers umpire, played a major role in the development of judicial review of the constitutionality of legislation in the United States, in Canada, in Australia, in India, and most recently in the United Kingdom. Second, there is a rights from wrongs phenomenon at work in the growth of judicial review in the United States, after the Civil War; in Canada, with the 1982 adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; in India, after the Indira Gandhi State of Emergency led to a massive trampling on human rights; in Israel, after the Holocaust; in South Africa, after racist apartheid misrule; and in the United Kingdom, after that country accumulated an embarrassing record before the European Court of Human Rights prior to 1998. This proves that judicial review of the constitutionality of legislation often occurs in response to a deprivation of human rights. Third, the seven common law countries all borrowed a lot from one another, and from civil law countries, in writing their constitutions. Fourth, and finally, the common law countries all create multiple democratic institutions or political parties, which renders any political attempt to strike back at the Supreme Court impossible to maintain.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi

This book is about the stunning birth and growth of judicial review in the civil law world, since 1945. In Volume I of this two-volume series, I showed that judicial review was born and grew in common law G-20 constitutional democracies and in Israel primarily: (1) when there is a need for a federalism or a separation of powers umpire, (2) when there is a rights from wrongs dynamic, (3) when there is borrowing, and (4) when the political structure of a country’s institutions leaves space within which the judiciary can operate. The countries discussed in Volume I were the following: (1) the United States, (2) Canada, (3) Australia, (4) India, (5) Israel, (6) South Africa, and (7) the United Kingdom....


2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 863-880
Author(s):  
Sir Gordon Slynn

This article outlines the difficulties which were felt to exist in the prerogative orders of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition in the United Kingdom, despite important developments which had taken place in their use. It describes in detail the recommendations of the Law Commission and the changes introduced both by Rules of Court and legislation. The former procedures are replaced by an application for judicial review, though the basis upon which relief is granted remains substantially the same. Recent cases show the way in which the new procedure has developed. Distinctions are drawn between the test to be applied on the application for leave and on the final hearing, and between the proceeding by way of judicial review to challenge the acts of public authorities and actions where purely private rights are claimed. This article shows the way in which the possibility of exceptions to this latter distinction has been established and suggests that the ambit of the new procedure is still in course of development.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-161
Author(s):  
David McClean

This piece offers an account of the law relating to immigration and asylum, especially as it affects ministers of religion and those who give religious reasons for seeking asylum. Beside Nicholas Coulton's passionate advocacy,1 this paper must seem bloodless and even unfeeling. It is a revised version of part of a paper for the European Consortium on Church and State Research, an essentially ‘black-letter’ account of one country's national law constructed to a template that enabled comparisons to be drawn. It began with the observation that United Kingdom immigration law is of daunting complexity; only some limited aspects can be addressed here.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document