header-logo header-logo

Grave interference with family life

18 September 2009
Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Human rights
printer mail-detail

An Afghani wife from Pakistan has won the right to join her refugee husband in the UK because refusal by the Appeal Immigration Tribunal violated her Art 8 rights.

In refusing entry the Appeal Immigration Tribunal (AIT) said that under the Immigration Rules a wife could not join a husband who had limited leave to stay in the UK if they marry abroad after he came to seek asylum. The wife appealed on the grounds that it unlawfully interfered with family life under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The AIT acknowledged that the Immigration Rules discriminate unfairly against such refugees particularly when other classes of migrants are not under such disability but it warned against using Art 8 to ‘correct perceived faults in legislative provisions’.

Richard Cahill, solicitor at Cahill De Fonseka and immigration specialist said that the lack of provisions for post-flight spouse to join recognised refugees in the UK was based on ‘concerns about speculative asylum claims’ and ‘entry clearance applications based on marriages of convenience’.

The Court

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll