header-logo header-logo

Immigration

28 March 2013
Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Lord Carlile of Berriew & Others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 199, [2013] All ER (D) 224 (Mar)

It was settled law that, where special expertise was required, the court had to grant a wide margin to the secretary of state’s decision in matters of national security and foreign policy and the court should not substitute its judgment for that of the secretary of state. The executive took responsibility for issues of national security and the handling of international relations and was democratically accountable for the merits of the decisions of Parliament. The court reserved to itself the responsibility for seeing that the decision complied with the law, was not irrational and complied strictly with procedural requirements. The secretary of state had accordingly been entitled to have regard to the welfare of the local staff and to the protection of British property in Tehran in refusing entry to the UK to a prominent Iranian dissident.

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll