header-logo header-logo

30 November 2012
Issue: 7540 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Immigration

R (on the application of BB) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and another [2012] EWCA Civ 1499, [2012] All ER (D) 210 (Nov)

Neither the detention of an individual pending his deportation, nor the grant of conditional bail pending deportation, involved a determination of civil rights within the meaning of Art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The expulsion of an alien and his detention pending expulsion did not determine his civil rights. At most, they incidentally had an effect on those rights. The distinction was critical in the context of a state’s control over aliens who were within its territory. The fact that the exercise of the power to deport would have an effect on an individual’s right to respect for private and family life or other rights did not mean that the exercise of the power involved a determination of the individual’s civil rights. So too, the fact that the detention of an individual pending deportation would affect him in that way did not mean that the detention involved a determination of civil rights.

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