header-logo header-logo

Immigration

12 April 2013
Issue: 7555 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

J1 v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 279, [2013] All ER (D) 283 (Mar)

It was established law that: (i) in cases where the claimant sought asylum or a right to remain in the UK on human rights grounds, the court or tribunal had to determine that claim on the basis of current evidence; (ii) where the claim was based upon dangers confronting the claimant in their home state, that determination involved an assessment of what would happen, or what there was a real risk of happening, in the future; (iii) in determining the claim the court or tribunal would take into account any undertaking or assurance given by the secretary of state, in so far as it was relevant to the issues under consideration; (iv) such an assurance or undertaking could not cut down the legal protection to which the claimant was entitled; (v) if the route or method of return was unknown, the court or tribunal might in appropriate cases leave that matter for later decision by the secretary of state,

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

Browne Jacobson—Matthew Kemp

Browne Jacobson—Matthew Kemp

Firm grows real estate team with tenth partner hire this financial year

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

NEWS
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
The Ministry of Justice is once again in the dock as access to justice continues to deteriorate. NLJ consultant editor David Greene warns in this week's issue that neither public legal aid nor private litigation funding looks set for a revival in 2026
Civil justice lurches onward with characteristic eccentricity. In his latest Civil Way column, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist, surveys a procedural landscape featuring 19-page bundle rules, digital possession claims, and rent laws he labels ‘bonkers’
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
back-to-top-scroll