Adedoyin v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 773, [2010] All ER (D) 53 (Jul)
The word “false” in para 320(7A) or para 322(1A) of the Immigration Rules HC 395 was used in the meaning of “dishonest” rather than “incorrect”. The reasons why the meaning “dishonest” was to be preferred were because, first, “false representation” was aligned in the Rules with “false document”. Secondly, however, a false representation stated in all innocence might be simply a matter of mistake, or an error short of dishonesty.
It did not necessarily tell a lie about itself. In such a case there was little reason for a requirement of mandatory refusal. Thirdly, the non-disclosure of material facts was also a mandatory ground of refusal. Fourthly, in a situation where a word had two distinct, and distinctively important, meanings, there was a genuine ambiguity which made it legitimate, in construing the Rules which were expressions of the executive’s policy, to consider what the executive had said, publicly, about its rules.
The assurance as to the meaning of the
