header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Court clarifies statelessness in Al-Jedda

14 October 2013
Issue: 7580 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Home secretary acted unlawfully in stripping refugee of British citizenship

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Home Secretary Theresa May acted unlawfully when she stripped a refugee of his citizenship, because she rendered him stateless.

Hilal Al-Jedda, an Iraqi who claimed asylum in the UK in 1992, was granted British citizenship in 2000, automatically losing his Iraqi citizenship.

In 2004, he travelled to Iraq with his family, where he was arrested and subsequently detained for three years by the British authorities, who believed he was involved in terrorism. Al-Jedda denied the allegations, and no criminal charges were ever brought.

The home secretary then revoked his British citizenship, and he travelled to Turkey. 

Under s 40(4) of the British Nationality Act 1981, a secretary of state may not make a deprivation of citizenship order where satisfied that an order would render a person stateless.

The home secretary argued that her order did not make Al-Jedda stateless because he could have applied for Iraqi citizenship.

Dismissing her appeal, in Home Secretary v Al-Jedda [2013] UKSC 62, Lord Wilson said a s 40(4) inquiry was a “straightforward exercise… it is whether the person holds another nationality at the date of the order”. 

Lord Wilson noted that Home Office guidance on statelessness, published this year, incorporated the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ guidance, which provides that “an individual’s nationality is to be assessed as at the time of determination of eligibility…it is neither a historic nor a predictive exercise”. 

Phil Shiner, solicitor at Public Interest Lawyers, who acted for Al-Quedda, says the ruling “clarifies the law relating to statelessness”.

In separate proceedings, the European Court of Human Rights held in 2011 that Al-Jedda’s internment in Iraq had breached his Art 5(1) right to liberty.

 

Issue: 7580 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bevan Brittan—Amanda Wright-Kluger

Bevan Brittan—Amanda Wright-Kluger

Health and care advocate appointed as partner

Glaisyers ETL—Gareth Farrelly

Glaisyers ETL—Gareth Farrelly

International football star turned solicitor joins the team in Liverpool

Excello Law—Robin Gill

Excello Law—Robin Gill

Corporate lawyer joins commercial law firm as partner

NEWS
As autumn beckons, the recent earthquake in litigation funding will be occupying the minds of many lawyers. In this week’s NLJ, Professor Dominic Regan—AKA 'The insider'—focuses his column on the impact of the Supreme Court case R (PACCAR & Ors) v CAT.
Former district judge Stephen Gold takes us through ways in which to avoid the fixed recoverable costs regime, due to come into force on 1 October, in this week’s 'Civil way'.
Nuisance in its various forms is the subject of Nicholas Dobson’s latest article, in this week’s NLJ
Deadlines, expiry dates and limitation periods surely lurk in the nightmares of most lawyers. Writing in this week’s NLJ, Andrew Francis, barrister at Serle Court, sets out three recent cases that demonstrate ‘the importance of taking steps to avoid claims being time-barred’.
The Law Commission has recommended a series of reforms to the Arbitration Act 1996, including extending immunity so that arbitrators are protected from liability when they resign or are removed.
back-to-top-scroll