The Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shafiq Ur Rehman Court of Appeal

2003 ◽  
pp. 439-455
Legal Studies ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satvinder S. Juss

The purpose of this article is to examine the impact of two recent decisions on an immigrant’s right of appeal: Secretary of State for the Home Department v Sonia Mahli was decided in the Court of Appeal in December 1989 and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Oladehinde was decided by the House of Lords in October 1990. Both cases raised other substantive issues of considerable importance for public lawyers: Oldehinde made the important point that the Secretary of State for the Home Department could delegate to senior immigration officers his powers to make deportation decisions; Malhi demonstrated how limited are the natural justice rights of overstayers.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (16) ◽  
pp. 219
Author(s):  
Roger Pezzani

<strong><strong><em></em></strong></strong><p align="LEFT">R (on the application of ‘MM’) v Secretary of State for the Home Department</p><p align="LEFT">Court of Appeal; 6 July 2007</p><p>[2007] EWCA Civ 687</p><strong><em></em></strong><em></em>


Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Abbasi v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, before the Court of Appeal. This case concerned, among other things, whether foreign policy decisions made by the executive under the prerogative power could ever constitute justiciable matters arguable before the courts. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.


2004 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-132

This is an appeal against a decision of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal (“the IAT”) given on 20 February 2003 when it allowed the Secretary of State's appeal against the determination of the Adjudicator promulgated on 10 July 2002. The Adjudicator had allowed the appellant's appeal against the decision of the Secretary of State, made on 26 April 2001, by which he refused the appellant leave to enter the United Kingdom. Permission to appeal to this court was granted by Pill LJ and Maurice Kay J on 26 June 2003, following earlier refusal by Kennedy LJ on 2 June 2003 on consideration of the papers only. I should add that shortly before the substantive hearing in this court the Terrence Higgins Trust (“the THT”) applied to intervene in the appeal. I directed that while the court would take account of the skeleton argument submitted by the THT, we would decide at the substantive hearing of the appeal whether or to what extent we wished to hear oral submissions on its behalf. In the event we received without objection certain further documentation from the THT but declined to hear oral argument from its counsel Ms. Webber. We are grateful for the documentary materials which the THT has provided.


Author(s):  
David Mylan

<p>R (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for the Home Department<br />[2002] EWCA Civ 647<br />Court of Appeal (15th May 2002) Lord Phillips MR, Dyson LJ, and Jonathan Parker LJ</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document