header-logo header-logo

11 May 2012
Issue: 7513 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Immigration

AA (Somalia) v Entry Clearance officer (Addis Ababa) [2012] EWCA Civ 563, [2012] All ER (D) 06 (May)

On the true construction of the Immigration Rules (HC 251) (the Rules) para 6 and therefore para 309A applied to para 352D. The interpretation plainly set out exhaustively who was to be regarded for the purpose of the Rules as an “adoptive parent” and there was nothing in either para 6 or in para 352D that indicated a contrary intention for the purpose of entry clearance applications under para 352D. That interpretation did not create a lacuna as Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was open to applicants in appropriate cases. There was no proper basis for saying that there could be some notion of adoption applicable to entry clearance applications under para 352D of the Rules which operated separately from and outside the meaning otherwise given to it for the other purposes of the Rules. The interpretation to be applied under para 6 of the Rules to “adoption” itself expressly brought into play, unless the contrary intention appeared, the requirements of para 309A of the Rules. Although

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll