header-logo header-logo

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

Immigration

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

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