header-logo header-logo

Immigration

13 August 2010
Issue: 7430 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

TR v Asylum and Immigration Tribunal [2010] EWHC 2055 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 35 (Aug)

The test to be applied when a decision had to be made about whether to extend time under r 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 2005 (SI 2005/230) was whether the duty judge of the tribunal was satisfied that, by reason of special circumstances, it would be unjust not to extend time. The tribunal should apply the guidelines set out in BO and others (Extension of time for appealing) (Nigeria) [2006] UKIAT 00035 in considering every extension of time application.

Consequently, any judicial review challenge to an extension of time decision had to consider, as its starting point, the question of whether the guidelines were followed. The guidelines emphasised that any failure or shortcoming of a legal practitioner that had contributed to a delay in appealing had to be considered. Therefore, any practitioner involved in an extension of time application had a duty of candour to the tribunal in providing a full explanation and disclosure of any shortcomings he was

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