header-logo header-logo

27 November 2009
Issue: 7395 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Asylum

R (on the application of EW) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWHC 2957 (Admin)

The issue before the court concerned whether, having regard to the Italian immigration system and the conditions in that state generally, the secretary of state’s decision to certify an asylum claim, and thus the obligation then to transfer the asylum seeker to Italy, involved a breach of Art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The court held that there was no general right to accommodation or a minimum standard of living that could be drawn from the convention or the Directives, or from elsewhere in the European or domestic human rights, social or other legislation.

The setting of such a minimum standard—no matter how low—was a matter for social legislation, not the courts. The court had to adopt a cautious approach to ensure that it did not inappropriately encroach into areas reserved to the political decision of the executive government.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll