header-logo header-logo

08 December 2011
Issue: 7493 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of Mayaya and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 3088 (Admin), [2011] All ER (D) 193 (Nov)

The secretary of state’s policy on discretionary leave provided that a person who had committed a serious crime would not normally receive a grant of discretionary leave for a period exceeding six months, and while those who had been granted discretionary leave were ordinarily eligible for indefinite leave to remain after six years, those who had committed serious crimes could only obtain indefinite leave to remain after 10 years of discretionary leave to remain. At its highest, the no-fettering principle meant that a person had to know what the relevant policy of a public authority entailed and had to be able to make submissions about its application in their individual case. The public authority then had to consider that case on its merits.

The discretionary policy breached the no-fettering principle by suggesting that a person always had to have had at least 10 years’ discretionary leave to be granted indefinite leave to

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

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths strengthens national tax team with Heather Gibson appointment

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

NEWS
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
A client cannot use a costs assessment to investigate whether their solicitor received commission on an after-the-event (ATE) insurance premium, the Court of Appeal has held
Law firms cannot be compelled to disclose documents protected by unwaived legal professional privilege (LPP) during misconduct investigations, the High Court has clarified
Solicitors have urged regulators not to impose unnecessary cost and complexity on third-party litigation funding
International demand for UK legal services is surging, with exports at record levels, according to Law Society research
back-to-top-scroll