header-logo header-logo

Immigration

05 October 2012
Issue: 7532 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Secretary of State for the Home Department v FV (Italy) [2012] EWCA Civ 1199, [2012] All ER (D) 97 (Sep)

The test to be applied to establish “imperative grounds of public security” in reg 21(4) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1003), was as stated in Tsakouridis Land Baden-Wurttemberg v Tsakourdis: C 145/09 [2010] All ER (D) 247 (Nov), namely that the conduct of the person concerned had to represent a genuine and present threat to a fundamental interest of society or of the member state concerned. Previous criminal convictions could not in themselves constitute grounds for taking public policy or public security measures and justifications that were isolated from the particulars of the case or that relied on considerations of general prevention could not be accepted. Consequently, an expulsion measure had to be based on an individual examination of the specific case. It was further settled law (applying the case of PI: Case C-349/09, unreported 22 May 2012) that the concept of “imperative grounds of public security” presupposed not only the existence of

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